List Mgmt. 2016 List Management: Contracts, Trading, Drafting, Academy

[Bokonon]

Pick 20 is worth 912 points next year. Enough to pay for an academy bloke at pick 14. Its more than fair.

I think a bit more, I've seen him play a number of times.
A deal kinda needs to be done. And it will depend on you clubs due diligence re health, I get. No one wins if he goes to the draft. I think we'll get a bit higher, one way or the other.
If I wanted to be critical of him I would say he trys to mark too often when a punch would work better, but wouldn't shoot a teenager for being overconfident. We might be in the market for a small forward so academy not the only consideration.

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

I bend over backwards to card fools who troll your club mate. And you respond with mod abuse and calling me names?

Have it your way. I'll remember that.

Yet to see any evidence of that (and I'm not your mate) trolls continue to troll and the closest thing I've seen to time off is a single day for a single poster (which didn't attract a single point)

Funny, I never see any of our guys get a day off. Never one of those days off that don't attract points to cool down. Nope, straight to the suspensions.

And you'll remember? Wow. So next time I'll know it's personal. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[Bostonian]

I think you have to compare Plowman to Marchbank somewhat to get an idea of their value in the trade market.

Plowman was a pick 3 who'd put together 20 games over three seasons before he requested a trade.

Marchbank was a pick 6 who has played less games(and a season less) and is more injury prone prior to his trade request.

With that said they are both similar in value imo.

If people take the sensible approach you'd be looking at a similar pick to that which obtained Plowman as a starting basis for what Marchbank is worth.

That pick in the end was Geelong's first round pick for this season. GWS would have known that Geelong would probably have a decent season so they were never going to get a low pick when trading Plowman. To get that kind of value it'll be around the late first to early second round of the draft imo where the clubs should reach some common ground.

There zero recent precedence for a player like Marchbank warranting a top 5 pick.

 

[Malifice]

I'm not your mate

Cool. Then I'll stop talking to you.

Thanks for the heads up.

No worries.

 

[Malifice]

We might be in the market for a small forward so academy not the only consideration.

It basically adds up to pick 20 next year.

As it is you'll be trading out players/ picks in this draft at a slight loss for 2017 picks (so you can again take another half dozen academy blokes in 2017).

Thanks to recent changes to the points system, you blokes need a list vacancy on the day of the draft for every pick you take to the draft. As it stands I expect you guys to bow out of the draft after the second round (maybe the third) with half a dozen academy players added to the list.

You need points for 2017 more than points for 2016. Your list manager will put a premium on points in '17. Pick 20 next year adds up to a mid-late first round academy bid matched in 2017.

 

[Burgers45]

I think this guy, as an independent, is right on the ball.....He says Pick 21 - 25, fair price?


http://footyprophet.com/caleb-marchbank-market-value/

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

There zero recent precedence for a player like Marchbank warranting a top 5 pick.

I don't think any of us have said he's worth pick 5. But bundled with another player and/or pick(s).... Well that depends on the player(s)/pick(s) involved doesn't it?

Carlton people are flat out refusing to even consider pick 5 being involved when we all know that you will have to use that (or get close via other trades) while we'll have to bundle something with Marchbank to make up the difference. 'Cause your second rounder this or next year alone ain't going to cut it.

 

[Bokonon]

It basically adds up to pick 20 next year.

As it is you'll be trading out players/ picks in this draft at a slight loss for 2017 picks (so you can again take another half dozen academy blokes in 2017).

Thanks to recent changes to the points system, you blokes need a list vacancy on the day of the draft for every pick you take to the draft. As it stands I expect you guys to bow out of the draft after the second round (maybe the third) with half a dozen academy players added to the list.

You need points for 2017 more than points for 2016. Your list manager will put a premium on points in '17. Pick 20 next year adds up to a mid-late first round academy bid matched in 2017.

Yeah
Our list is at the size it needs to be, we will want points next year I get. This year we're probably ok. Issue is you're second round next year is unkown. We did well from Collingwoods first this year becuase it was undervalued by them in the Treloar trade. You seem to be going the other way and It seems I'm more confident in you ladder position than you appear to be.
Cant agree with 2017 second round, although I get you're argument. Anyone you draft next year would be more of a risk. If Caleb is fit, he is proven at AFL level and I know from our youngsters you never really know until then. That's my opinion, would be interesting to see Dianod's, I would defer to him and others on trade value.

 

[Big Stinky Monk]

I'll be sorry to lose Marchbank as I like what he has shown, but it is what it is.

I think our eyes would be firmly on Carltons 2017 1st rounder (which i believe would be 5-9 ish).

On its own would be considered overs by Carlton so we'd have to look at throwing in another player or later pick (possibly one of our 2016 2nd rounders - depending on how many kids we want to draft this year) to balance it up.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Future first round would most likely get it done

It will have to be more than just Marchbank for our 2017 first rounder. You guys seem to be over valuing him, been on your list for two years, only 7 games, cant get fit and/ or stay fit, I do realize he was a former number 6 pick though. Marchbank alone would only be worth our 2017 second rounder. Our 2017 second rounder is more important to you guys than it is for Carlton.

 

[Malifice]

Yeah
Our list is at the size it needs to be, we will want points next year I get. This year we're probably ok. Issue is you're second round next year is unkown. We did well from Collingwoods first this year becuase it was undervalued by them in the Treloar trade. You seem to be going the other way and It seems I'm more confident in you ladder position than you appear to be.
Cant agree with 2017 second round, although I get you're argument. Anyone you draft next year would be more of a risk. If Caleb is fit, he is proven at AFL level and I know from our youngsters you never really know until then. That's my opinion, would be interesting to see Dianod's, I would defer to him and others on trade value.

We'll be bottom 3 next year mate. We're currently second last, behind Brisbane:

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/australian-rules/afl/-AFL-Premiership-Winner-2017-2808833.html

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/australian-rules/afl

To put things in perspective, our leading goal scorer this year was a 26 year old DFA from Adelaide in Matty Wright with 22 odd.

Thats not going to change, and Simpson cant hold down the fort forever. Most clubs that finished under us (Dons, Suns and Freo) should improve markedly and I cant see any clubs dropping off next year in a big way (barring North).

I fully expect a bottom 3 finish next year.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I don't think any of us have said he's worth pick 5. But bundled with another player and/or pick(s).... Well that depends on the player(s)/pick(s) involved doesn't it?

Carlton people are flat out refusing to even consider pick 5 being involved when we all know that you will have to use that (or get close via other trades) while we'll have to bundle something with Marchbank to make up the difference. 'Cause your second rounder this or next year alone ain't going to cut it.

You seem to be missing the point that to GWS, our 2017 second rounder for Marchbank alone, holds far more importance to you guys than it does if Carlton kept it, it enables you to aquire what it takes to be able to draft your reportedly super crop of academy players next year.

 

[Bostonian]

Carlton people are flat out refusing to even consider pick 5 being involved when we all know that you will have to use that (or get close via other trades) while we'll have to bundle something with Marchbank to make up the difference. 'Cause your second rounder this or next year alone ain't going to cut it.

I guess they are flat out considering it because a player like Marchbank doesn't warrant it being considered.

As I pointed out I think his value will be compared to what Plowman was worth. Which is a late first round pick at best if available. Meaning it's closer in value to our existing second roudner by a long way than it is to our first round pick which I can't see us shifting just to land Marchbank.

Maybe it ends up being two 2nd round picks for him. I just don't see our pick 5 going anywhere at this stage.

 

[Colonial]

Yet to see any evidence of that (and I'm not your mate) trolls continue to troll and the closest thing I've seen to time off is a single day for a single poster (which didn't attract a single point)

Funny, I never see any of our guys get a day off. Never one of those days off that don't attract points to cool down. Nope, straight to the suspensions.

And you'll remember? Wow. So next time I'll know it's personal. Thanks for the heads up.

That was hilarious from him. He gives warnings not cards. Thats us who get it.

 

[Malifice]

That was hilarious from him. He gives warnings not cards. Thats us who get it.

You two get it for telling people to go * themselves and worse.

I assure you if I see GWS trolling it's an infraction. In particular any reference to 'plastic club'.

The reason you don't see it is because you can't see other people's infractions. But hey. We're all out to get you.

Just report them and I'll whack them for you.

I take some blame because I don't sent report resolution emails so you don't see the outcome.

 

[OrangeDuck]

So are we just going to get swamped by Carlton people with the idea that the more people say something, the more likely it is to happen?

 

[Colonial]

You two get it for telling people to go **** themselves and worse.

I assure you if I see GWS trolling it's an infraction. In particular any reference to 'plastic club'.

The reason you don't see it is because you can't see other people's infractions. But hey. We're all out to get you.

Just report them and I'll whack them for you.

I take some blame because I don't sent report resolution emails so you don't see the outcome.

Haha yeah sure. Umm you know i know thats bullshit so dont qoute me with the innocent act.

Ive already been advised by others and seen it for myself.

Hell youve already threatened one of ours a page ago.

So move on.

 

[Bokonon]

So are we just going to get swamped by Carlton people with the idea that the more people say something, the more likely it is to happen?

Reality is if he is determined to fo to Carlton he will get there. It will take balls but he refuse any other trade until the draft if necesssry and even then. Only risk is if Carlton dont offer an acceptable deal to him.

 

[Bokonon]

I think you have to compare Plowman to Marchbank somewhat to get an idea of their value in the trade market.

Plowman was a pick 3 who'd put together 20 games over three seasons before he requested a trade.

Marchbank was a pick 6 who has played less games(and a season less) and is more injury prone prior to his trade request.

With that said they are both similar in value imo.

If people take the sensible approach you'd be looking at a similar pick to that which obtained Plowman as a starting basis for what Marchbank is worth.

That pick in the end was Geelong's first round pick for this season. GWS would have known that Geelong would probably have a decent season so they were never going to get a low pick when trading Plowman. To get that kind of value it'll be around the late first to early second round of the draft imo where the clubs should reach some common ground.

There zero recent precedence for a player like Marchbank warranting a top 5 pick.

Issue is whether you're round one is top 5, I'm not convinced. Either way in a cold sense you risk his fitness and we risk you having a good year. Strange world trading?

 

[Bokonon]

We'll be bottom 3 next year mate. We're currently second last, behind Brisbane:

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/australian-rules/afl/-AFL-Premiership-Winner-2017-2808833.html

http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/australian-rules/afl

To put things in perspective, our leading goal scorer this year was a 26 year old DFA from Adelaide in Matty Wright with 22 odd.

Thats not going to change, and Simpson cant hold down the fort forever. Most clubs that finished under us (Dons, Suns and Freo) should improve markedly and I cant see any clubs dropping off next year in a big way (barring North).

I fully expect a bottom 3 finish next year.

I'm not convinced but my boss is a carlton supporter in a non AFL world. In case I need time off for the GF , my reflex not to rubbish you're prospects.

 

[Bostonian]

Issue is whether you're round one is top 5, I'm not convinced. Either way in a cold sense you risk his fitness and we risk you having a good year. Strange world trading?

Sure is, but as of now, we're risking the most in this potential trade due in part to the repsective strenghts of both clubs lists at present.

 

[Bokonon]

Sure is, but as of now, we're risking the most in this potential trade due in part to the repsective strenghts of both clubs lists at present.

Cant see that, if were negotiating the price of car relative wealth isn't a direct factor. Caleb is gone, we are going to act in our best interests as Carlton wiĺl in theirs. Ultimately it's the pre season draft if he's committed to you.

 

[Colonial]

Sure is, but as of now, we're risking the most in this potential trade due in part to the repsective strenghts of both clubs lists at present.

That makes no sense.

 

[Bostonian]

That makes no sense.

Makes plenty of sense.

We don't have the draft picks or potential to land them like you that we can just take a flyer on a player who comes with high risk potential.

Thus this trade involves far more risk for us than you.

 

[Colonial]

Makes plenty of sense.

We don't have the draft picks or potential to land them like you that we can just take a flyer on a player who comes with high risk potential.

Thus this trade involves far more risk for us than you.

So, to use a metaphore;

Because we are rich and you are not, we are going to sell a fairly new car at junker costs?
And why would we help Carlton? What have you guys done for us?