List Mgmt. 2013 Trade / Draft / Free Agency

[_Maximus_12]

Given it's only late July we've still got possibly 3 months more of this torturous wait - you beauty.

 

[St_Laz]

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?

I like the idea. But I think both trades are in our favor (actually I especially like that...)
Essendon would want more for bellchambers (due to age of Dal) but maybe a swap of later picks would fix that.
I don't think bellchambers and Gilbert would satisfy GWS.
Would essendon accept pick 10 for bellchambers? Definitely.
Is Gilbert worth an upgrade from 10 to 1? No.
It just doesn't add up for me unfortunately.

 

[God Save Max King]

Melbourne need to be remodelled. They need a fresh board.

Just a warning as you are relatively new to BigFooty, do not troll team A (Melbourne) when you go for Team B (Geelong) on the board of Team C (St Kilda). It doesn't end well.

 

[Persevering Saint]

The thing I'm realising is, look, we're probably going to get 2 or 3 belters in from the top 20. But that means 18 or 17 will go to some other clubs. And many of those will be terrific too. If we get Aish, others will have got Kelly, Scharenberg, Boyd, etc, etc, etc. That means the real differential is less about which player we actually get, and more about how we develop them.

 

[God Save Max King]

The thing I'm realising is, look, we're probably going to get 2 or 3 belters in from the top 20. But that means 18 or 17 will go to some other clubs. And many of those will be terrific too. If we get Aish, others will have got Kelly, Scharenberg, Boyd, etc, etc, etc. That means the real differential is less about which player we actually get, and more about how we develop them.

Spot on. The kids Geelong drafted weren't more talented, they were just developed better.

 

[Periphery]

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.

I agree completely.

I would scrap the whole plan if Lenny doesn't play next year. We would be losing to much experience that we need to help develop the young guys.

We also can't afford to lose Dal (or even Gilbert for example) if he is not 100% behind the trade. Not only would we be losing a quality player but we would be hurting the culture of the club. Show the young guys that we will stand by our legends so that they will show the same loyalty to club in the future.

I like the idea. But I think both trades are in our favor (actually I especially like that...)
Essendon would want more for bellchambers (due to age of Dal) but maybe a swap of later picks would fix that.
I don't think bellchambers and Gilbert would satisfy GWS.
Would essendon accept pick 10 for bellchambers? Definitely.
Is Gilbert worth an upgrade from 10 to 1? No.
It just doesn't add up for me unfortunately.

It doesn't really add up all that well for me either unfortunately. I just can't think of anything else we could do to get even remotely close to getting pick 1 without trading McEvoy, which I don't think we should do. I'd be happy to play around with putting in picks/other players as this was just a rough idea for something that might be possible.

The main issue is that we don't have that much trade currency at the moment and any we do have is fairly integral to the team and shouldn't be given away unless we get a good deal. If the price is not right we should just walk away and focus on developing the players we can get with our current picks.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Interesting article on Mitch Thorp (194cm, previously taken at pick 6 in the ND by Hawthorn) in the HS today, saying that he's become a "goalkicking machine" (52 goals in 13 games) down in Tassie is his playing-coaching role, while playing mainly midfield. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...t-an-afl-career/story-fnia3v71-1226684649930#

Reckons he's matured immensely since he was cut by Hawthorn (helped by fatherhood and his coaching role- is the youngest ever to coach a team in the Tasmanian State League) and is being closely watched by the WB, if not other clubs (and they name us as one of 4 other clubs keen to add "attacking marking options").

"My strength is my endurance. I can run all day and take some pretty solid marks, but play where the team needs me more than anything," he said

Obviously Pelchen would know all about him. I wonder if we may be interested in him for CHB? He's a decent size and having a big tank and good marking ability (not to mention versatility) would be very handy. Wonder if he's ever played down back?

Add him for CHB and then someone a bit bigger for FB and we may be in (relative) business.

(Edit: I searched this thread for "Thorpe" to see if he had already been discussed, as I thought I remembered he had, but got pretty much nothing, but just realised there is no "e" on the end of his name and I now see he was discussed a bit about a month ago. No-one suggested him for the backline though, so I might do a bit of digging and see if he ever spent any time down back at Hawthorn.)

Here is the previous article on him: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-15/exhawk-eyes-second-chance

​

 

[God Save Max King]

Tasmanian football league though, everything must be scaled down.

 

[Half Back Pocket]

Spot on. The kids Geelong drafted weren't more talented, they were just developed better.

Exactly, says a lot for the stand-alone VFL model IMO

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I've now looked at players drafted from 2000 to 2007
The ratings are my own subjective ratings. So some of them may be slightly in the wrong category.
But I get:

Number 1 draft picks. 5 of 8 were out and out guns. ( 71%) The other 3 turned out good.
Top 3 draft picks 10 of 24 were guns ( 42% ). 13 were good ( 54%) , 1 average.( 4%)
Top 10 draft picks 17 of 80 were guns (21% ), 29 were good (36%), 18 were average ( 23%), 16 below average or worse (20%)
Top 20 draft picks 26 of 160 were guns (16%), 53 were good ( 33%), 40 were average ( 25%), 41 below average or worse (26%)

So by the time you are in the second half of the first round your chances of picking up a superstar are around 10%, not as high as your chances of picking up a total loser.

No point looking at later drafts, some of the talls are still not settled.
Also it doesn't take into account the different levels of talent in different drafts.

 

[Dopey BJ]

Hate to sound like a broken record but l think to get pick 1 Armo fits the bill as a sacrificial lamb.
Big hard body to help Giants light bodied midfield.

 

[Defacto]

Hate to sound like a broken record but l think to get pick 1 Armo fits the bill as a sacrificial lamb.
Big hard body to help Giants light bodied midfield.

said similar things to someone last night

armo + gilbert for pick 1?

 

[Dopey BJ]

said similar things to someone last night

armo + gilbert for pick 1?

Think Armo & Gilbert might be overs, maybe a juggle of picks and Armo

 

[God Save Max King]

Exactly, says a lot for the stand-alone VFL model IMO

Collingwood have developed some great kids as well.

 

[Defacto]

Think Armo & Gilbert might be overs, maybe a juggle of picks and Armo

i'd even pay part of their contracts and front load it next year, just to get the deal done

 

[SaintsSeptember]

said similar things to someone last night

armo + gilbert for pick 1?

If you have a draft pick outside the top ten you only have 42% chance of getting someone as good or better than Armitage.
I'd suggest its foolish to trade someone who is established as capable of being part of a rebuilt team. Otherwise you are digging a hole to fill in another.
Stick to players of which type we may have more than we need. ( Dempster/Gwilt/Ferg/Roberton/Gilbert) , or who only have a limited playing life remaining. ( Unfortunately the Latter are down in value for the same reason ).

 

[Dopey BJ]

If you have a draft pick outside the top ten you only have 42% chance of getting someone as good or better than Armitage.
I'd suggest its foolish to trade someone who is established as capable of being part of a rebuilt team. Otherwise you are digging a hole to fill in another.
Stick to players of which type we may have more than we need. ( Dempster/Gwilt/Ferg/Roberton/Gilbert) , or who only have a limited playing life remaining. ( Unfortunately the Latter are down in value for the same reason ).

l agree with what you say but reality is we are going to have to give up something we may not want too, to get pick 1 which is 100% good or better

 

[Winners Only]

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!

Exciting times ahead Brian if that is the case!

Ben's tap work is never going to be dominant because he doesn't have the natural leap to get above his opponents, hence I wouldn't be against trading McEvoy for the No 1 pick, as long as we maintained our own pick at 3-4.

 

[Defacto]

If you have a draft pick outside the top ten you only have 42% chance of getting someone as good or better than Armitage.
I'd suggest its foolish to trade someone who is established as capable of being part of a rebuilt team. Otherwise you are digging a hole to fill in another.
Stick to players of which type we may have more than we need. ( Dempster/Gwilt/Ferg/Roberton/Gilbert) , or who only have a limited playing life remaining. ( Unfortunately the Latter are down in value for the same reason ).

armitage is 25, i put his name up as he'll probably be 29 before we challenge again.

i can see others quickly going past him, compared to someone like steven that still has alot of upside.

i was thinking that pick 1 would allow us to finish up on the cattle needed for the fwd line. mids are easier to find than KPP, especially when the coming drafts are full of mids.

so the way i was looking at it is lets give up a mid and then fill the gap in that list with a ready made MID who can fill a gap whilst the younger players come on. someone like cockie who would come cheap

 

[joop]

Man I'll be pissed if we trade armo

 

[Defacto]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mi...ry-e6frf7jo-1226685049760?from=herald+sun_rss

its official almost

 

[SaintsSeptember]

l agree with what you say but reality is we are going to have to give up something we may not want too, to get pick 1 which is 100% good or better

I assume Jack Watts will end up good.

 

[Half Back Pocket]

I assume Jack Watts will end up good.

Ha Ha...that's Melbournes fault for choosing Watts instead of Nic Nat. Also, as has been shown, Melbournes development isn't great!

 

[The Punter]

You move on. Others still not getting a regular game at other clubs or injury prone and about to get cut. Sure we'll nab someone.

 

[hayes]

Damnit. Just one less option when it's already slim pickings. Who else is there?