List Mgmt. 2015 Trade & Free Agency Hellscape Discussion Thread (PG546: Anderson PG732: Bastinac)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Today I plugged in my ear phones to the computer and loaded up trade radio because it was in my favourites and I sat and listened to nothing for 8 hours :(

So essentially the same as TWR just without the noise.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'd rather get Shannon Grant out of retirement
Or fat Jarman

249204-shannon-grant.jpg

Gun. Used to love watching Shagga.
 
Could have just kept Basty. Bleh.
Yeah but even if he's no better he'd be much cheaper and hopefully more Nahas than Black[1] in terms of attitude to getting a second chance.

[1] though I'm still not convinced myself about Black's attitude being "bad" per se, based as it is on a single interview from his manager at the start of trade week and a couple of indirect rumors. But we'll go with him as a shorthand for dropping of bundle about not playing ones.
 
Yeah but even if he's no better he'd be much cheaper and hopefully more Nahas than Black[1] in terms of attitude to getting a second chance.

[1] though I'm still not convinced myself about Black's attitude being "bad" per se, based as it is on a single interview from his manager at the start of trade week and a couple of indirect rumors. But we'll go with him as a shorthand for dropping of bundle about not playing ones.
I mean in comparison to Moore.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hawks fail to land a big fish and didn't fare too well in the trading stakes, immediately start complaining about the rules and demand a new system for next year :rolleyes:

I think the Hawks got caught out in that first trade with us not understanding the value of picks 38+40.

How this happened at an AFL club ill never know, but in the wash up we really did get a very cheap deal for Anderson.

I do however agree with them that the system this year gave way to much power to the academy clubs. Not only did they get multiple points upgrades on their 1000 for 1200 points type deals, but they got to chose which clubs got the higher picks and who didn't. Add to that the 20% discount and the academy players will come all to cheap.

Not much can be done as to who the clubs trade with, at least there is no 19 YO tool chosing his club as the one and only.

The trading up of points and 20% discount however is something i see as double dipping. I think it needs a tweak to get the desired effect.

If trading picks is what the AFL want fine, let clubs increase their points that way but no discount. If the discount is their main objective, fine make it 25% but force the club to have a pick in the round the player is taken to use as a match.

Small tweaks that will make the system work better for next year.

Happy we got to exploit it a little with Anderson and Basti, shame we didnt target 10. Cant for the life of me understand why GWS held on to that one as Hopper will go inside 10 and they could have increased their position by moving it on.
 
I think the Hawks got caught out in that first trade with us not understanding the value of picks 38+40.

How this happened at an AFL club ill never know, but in the wash up we really did get a very cheap deal for Anderson.

I do however agree with them that the system this year gave way to much power to the academy clubs. Not only did they get multiple points upgrades on their 1000 for 1200 points type deals, but they got to chose which clubs got the higher picks and who didn't. Add to that the 20% discount and the academy players will come all to cheap.

Not much can be done as to who the clubs trade with, at least there is no 19 YO tool chosing his club as the one and only.

The trading up of points and 20% discount however is something i see as double dipping. I think it needs a tweak to get the desired effect.

If trading picks is what the AFL want fine, let clubs increase their points that way but no discount. If the discount is their main objective, fine make it 25% but force the club to have a pick in the round the player is taken to use as a match.

Small tweaks that will make the system work better for next year.

Happy we got to exploit it a little with Anderson and Basti, shame we didnt target 10. Cant for the life of me understand why GWS held on to that one as Hopper will go inside 10 and they could have increased their position by moving it on.
All that has to happen is drop the games for the father/son to 50 games again. Most clubs would be happy then.
 
Wouldn't it throw a spanner in the works if draft night started with.

Pick 1 Carlton - Callum Mills
Pick 2 Carlton - Ben Keays
Pick 3 Carlton - Jacop Hopper
Pick 4 Carlton - Jacob Weitering

It would destroy the drafting strategies of Syd, Bris and GWS as they would probably match regardless.
 
Respectfully disagree with my NM colleagues about the effect of the points system. Yes Sydney etc did trade sufficiently to get picks worth their academy players but few traded many key players in at the same time so they will get their academy players at the expense of having to play them early.

Key draft pick in this draft is pick 7 taken by Melbourne. You would imagine that Melbourne will use their pick 3. But Melbourne may use their pick 7 to chase Sydney academy boys given the influence of Roos therefore driving up the number of picks required by Sydney to get them.

It's a no lose proposition. If Melbourne don't get the player, Sydney pay top dollar and if they do, they get a good player.
 
I don't know, maybe I'm different to others, but I don't look for validation from the media and club wouldn't even read the nonsense.

2009, Voss was considered to have had a very good trade period. He screwed the list for many years to come.

But yep, finishing first on the trade ladder in October is where it all counts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top