Analysis 2016 AFL Trade Week Thread

[pastmyprimus]

Don't want to dwell on the Gibbs non-trade but the Crows were always going to have to pay overs to get him. He recently signed a 5 year contract. Why would Carlton only accept a fair price - the Crows had little leverage (eg, Gibbs couldn't threaten to go in the national/pre-season draft) other than his desire to go back home.

The AFL has made it easier for players to move to other clubs through free agency, and a lot of good players have benefited by being offered longer deals and more $ at their current club, just like Gibbs. Clubs have every right to enforce their player contracts.

 

[Macca19]

It's a 'shit situation' made by our own doings and yet no blame ever gets put on a person/s for doing so.

While we keep doing the same over and over we will continue to get similar results, as has been proven the past couple of years.

We need top end talent, not just guys that do an average job, neither great or horribly bad, and all the pressure gets thrown on a couple of top end players as to why we continually fail.

Our list beneath our top end sucks. Evidence = this years trade period.

Filling it again with more lucky dip types won't rectify this at all, without considerable luck. It wont come through the eye of Geoff Parker, that's for sure.

At the start of trade week we had 1 first round pick, 0 2nd round picks this year. 1 of each next year.

Now, we have 2 first round picks this year, 2 2nd round picks this year, 1 2nd round pick next year.

How is this not improving our position? All because we traded out pick 9? Maybe people need to go back and have a look at the historical #9s over the last 10-15 years, it is just as much a lucky dip as any other.

Rightly or wrongly, the recruiting team believe that putting more worth into this years draft is the correct thing to do. There is literally no wrong answer to this at the moment. We don't know. Certainly noone on this forum knows if its the right thing to do. Some people rate next year higher, some people rate this year higher. We won't know for at least 12 months, and then probably not realistically for another 3-4 years after that whether we've made the right call this year.

Noone wanted what we were selling. Hartlett chose to stay, Broady chose to stay, noone wanted Lobbe. So the only way we've had to invest in getting more quality players in is by being inventive with our draft picks. To end up with 2 first round picks and 2 2nd round picks when we had 1 and 0 at the start of the trade period, is a win. Would I prefer to have next years 1st rounder? Absolutely, but theres a trade period next year to get back into next years draft.

 

[Lagooner]

Scenario E: Sydney unearth the next Dangerfield/Rioli/Lynch with #9

We take #14 Sellar #17 Lobbe #30 Symes #31 Peel

I don't even want to think about what GC17 do with next year's first.

#allthemelts

It's actually with Brisbane, so they'll draft a young star who'll escape home 2 years later.

How's the 2017 SA crop?

 

[Macca19]

Youre surprised that people are upset about our club having no future ????

Over the next two drafts we've gone from having 2 first round picks and 1 2nd round pick, to having....2 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

Yeah...no future. Some people whinge and im not even sure they know what they are whinging at

 

[Portia]

Seems funny to have a list manager based in Melbourne when we only trade with clubs in NSW and QLD

 

[KenOath]

I think people here are distressed that we're stuck with Lobbe. We certainly tried I can assure you. Nobody wanted to touch his contract.
If we moved Lobbe I bet everyone here would be feeling a lot better.....including me I assure you.

Do you know if we offered to pay part of his contract at another club?

 

[Waspy79]

Scenario E: Sydney unearth the next Dangerfield/Rioli/Lynch with #9

We take #14 Sellar #17 Lobbe #30 Symes #31 Peel

I don't even want to think about what GC17 do with next year's first.

#allthemelts

Don't the Lions have it?

 

[proman_x]

Let's all ponder who our best player is at the moment and where he went in the draft.

This is a brilliant point.

It now comes down to WHO we pick and how we develop them. It will put some serious pressure on our group to perform, bolstering our depth and allowing Hinkley to actually drop players when needed. Especially if we pick at least 2 guys we think would be a serious chance to start in our 22 next year.

Lets hope they get this draft correct! No pressure guys

 

[Portia]

Over the next two drafts we've gone from having 2 first round picks and 1 2nd round pick, to having....2 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

Yeah...no future. Some people whinge and im not even sure they know what they are whinging at

The risk of trading out 2017 first round pick and it being a very high one - which we're still barreling towards it being coming off two years of shit and no list changes, and then the quality of those picks within the round Macca.

It is not even remotely unreasonable to be dissatisfied with the outcome of this trade week.

 

[Zakk Wylde]

Do you know if we offered to pay part of his contract at another club?

Not sure in that regard m8

 

[vozzon]

I think so too. I'd say we're going for Marshall and expect that if he's still there at 9 he'll also still be there at 14 and we'll then take a mid at 17. If Marshall goes earlier then Battle should still be available at 17, so we can take a mid with 14.

You'd then think Kerr or Hayward will likely still be there at 30, 31 too if we did want a second forward, but I'd prefer 3 genuine mids and then rookie list a development ruck.

Agree with that.

If louge is available, id would like him as well as a ready made def. If we get 2 mids (like william drew) and a KPF then we have 2 mids, 1 Fwd and 1 Def with the first 4 picks. Draft another project ruckman with a late pick/rookie, like the look of sweet.

 

[240volt]

It's a 'shit situation' made by our own doings and yet no blame ever gets put on a person/s for doing so.

While we keep doing the same over and over we will continue to get similar results, as has been proven the past couple of years.

We need top end talent, not just guys that do an average job, neither great or horribly bad, and all the pressure gets thrown on a couple of top end players as to why we continually fail.

Our list beneath our top end sucks. Evidence = this years trade period.

Filling it again with more lucky dip types won't rectify this at all, without considerable luck. It wont come through the eye of Geoff Parker, that's for sure.

If we walked in and put our pick 9 on the table with next years first rounder we would have walked away with a ready made KP player. We are going to have to get real lucky in the draft to make this good.

 

[Magpiespower]

Better than any Gameday thread.

And it lasted two weeks! Still some life in her yet. Oh, yeah.

But, man, I still can't believe we gave up the #1 pick in next year's draft...

 

[chiwigi]

It is spreading the risk. The more I think about it, the more I don't mind it.

Just because one can see the strategy it doesn't mean it's the best.

Two top ten picks for 2 late first and two second?
Daft.

 

[Doctor Feel]

lol, Fages working the twittersphere to satiate the masses baying for blood re: Gibbs failure.

#godhatesfages

 

[Forzaport]

So we wanted to regenerate the list.... I think 4 picks in the top 31 does that very well. We were always going to regenerate through the draft.

I have a few issues...

I can understand regenerating through the draft, no problems. Up to this point we've had no list turnover other than obvious delistings. Given Ah Chee, Jonas and Monfries will be with us in 2017 and we have 4 ND picks to use, it's looking unlikely that we'll recycle a Dawes or a Barlow.

I'm not exactly sure what people were expecting ? We were never in the game to land another gun player via trade. We were never getting Gibbs/JOM etc.

I don't think anyone expected us to be players for a big name.

I think people here are distressed that we're stuck with Lobbe. We certainly tried I can assure you. Nobody wanted to touch his contract.
If we moved Lobbe I bet everyone here would be feeling a lot better.....including me I assure you.

IMO this is grounds for instant termination. Lobbe's contract is so toxic that no other club wanted a bar of it, even though he's already 2 years in!

Lists aren't finalised and there'll certainly be more to play out with potential additions.

I ****ing hope so.

Lets not have kittens for **** sake. Some of the snot written the last couple of days has been farcical.

By all means, our list is far form in perfect shape, but we'll be a lot better off than all of you who have thrown your toys from the cot think we'll be.

I'm bullish on our list. I think it's capable. I just don't like us gambling on a strong 2017 after the 2 years of shit our list and coaches have produced.

Another myth is that people think we're stuck for next year.... Like we can't make any more moves or something.

Absolutely. We can trade our 2018 first round pick. Thank God we can't trade out 2 years ahead otherwise we'd truly **** ourselves.

 

[Spadge]

incoming 5AA melt.. tune in now guys!!!

btw Jeremy Cordeaux is a geriatric! That shithouse music he plays and the dinosaur aged shit he talks about must only appeal to the 85yr old blue rinse set...

 

[PAFCsince1870]

'Aging' starts won't get you a first rounder. To trade back in it will be a Pittard or Wines, so while you're back in you really haven't won, you've lost in doing so.

Brett Deledio disagrees.

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

incoming 5AA melt.. tune in now guys!!!

btw Jeremy Cordeaux is a geriatric! That shithouse music he plays and the dinosaur aged shit he talks about must only appeal to the 85yr old blue rinse set...

ie Crows supporters knitting and waiting for that nice Mr Rowe

 

[Macca19]

A shit situation this regime caused and has mortgaged next year's first in an attempt at alleviation.

Forgive us if some of us aren't enthused, McWisbey.

Correct. It is our fault. So we either sit on our hands and do nothing, or we try and fix it. I'm happy we are trying to fix it.

There is no guarantee next years first will be a top 10 pick.

People are holding pick 9 with reverence it does not deserve. In the last 23 years there have been 3 AA players and 2 premiership players drafted with pick 9. One of those players has both AA & a flag (Cornes). 4 heralded players in 23 years. Forgive me if i'm not going to act like we've just traded Chris Judd for magic beans.

 

[Lagooner]

At the start of trade week we had 1 first round pick, 0 2nd round picks this year. 1 of each next year.

Now, we have 2 first round picks this year, 2 2nd round picks this year, 1 2nd round pick next year.

How is this not improving our position? All because we traded out pick 9? Maybe people need to go back and have a look at the historical #9s over the last 10-15 years, it is just as much a lucky dip as any other.

Rightly or wrongly, the recruiting team believe that putting more worth into this years draft is the correct thing to do. There is literally no wrong answer to this at the moment. We don't know. Certainly noone on this forum knows if its the right thing to do. Some people rate next year higher, some people rate this year higher. We won't know for at least 12 months, and then probably not realistically for another 3-4 years after that whether we've made the right call this year.

Noone wanted what we were selling. Hartlett chose to stay, Broady chose to stay, noone wanted Lobbe. So the only way we've had to invest in getting more quality players in is by being inventive with our draft picks. To end up with 2 first round picks and 2 2nd round picks when we had 1 and 0 at the start of the trade period, is a win. Would I prefer to have next years 1st rounder? Absolutely, but theres a trade period next year to get back into next years draft.

It appears that we were not interested in what other's were selling either, which is frustrating considering the obvious positional holes in our list.

But I think there is some good news here, we improved our position a bit with today's deal, but the overall success (or failure) of this week really depends on where we finish in 2017 and the subsequent position of the 1st rounder now in Brisbane's hands.

We are the master's of our own destiny in this regard, I just don't know if that's a good thing or not.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

I don't blame the crers not entertaining two first rounders for Gibbs, the mistakes are the Lyons debacle and not having a fall back plan for the Gibbs situation.. but yea lol

 

[bomberclifford]

lol, Fages working the twittersphere to satiate the masses baying for blood re: Gibbs failure.

#godhatesfages

"mate, ..."

 

[Doctor Feel]

If we pick up Barrett and Dawes for free, we've done well and gone a long way to improving the structure of the list, with the chance to further right some wrongs in the draft.

The issue is I don't trust us to do this.

 

[tribey]

Forgive me if i'm not going to act like we've just traded Chris Judd for magic beans.

No.