Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[Navara79]

I wouldn't even waste a rookie spot on Majak. He's not up to it.

 

[Smegger]

They have a lot of money tied up in Goldy, tough spot they're in as Preuss looks more than handy. Majak could be an option with a later pick I spose.

Just asking the question because he's obviously slid down the pecking order. He could be on the cusp of breaking out. Hopefully Phillips can stand up this year and really show something. Then we might be looking for a second ruck instead of a first (if Kreuzer goes).

 

[Smegger]

I wouldn't even waste a rookie spot on Majak. He's not up to it.

Fair enough. He has shown glimpses but consistency is a problem so far.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Just asking the question because he's obviously slid down the pecking order. He could be on the cusp of breaking out. Hopefully Phillips can stand up this year and really show something. Then we might be looking for a second ruck instead of a first (if Kreuzer goes).

That'd be my hope. Phillips as No.1 and a late pick going out for our backup.

 

[Malifice]

We would also have Adelaide's first in this years draft but you are dreaming if you think GWS do that trade

Both players out of contract and nominating us. We're offering a top 3 pick next year.

We could sweeten it by sending the Kruezer FA pick to them as well in exchange for their second rounder.

 

[Gethelred]

They have rules about fair trades too, then Hawthorn sold their soul for a packet of stale twisties to St.Kilda.

Their excuse, the dude paid to look at this was on an excursion and not in at work on that day.

They make shit up on the run

Just on that, there's not been anywhere near enough scrutiny on this trade, I really hope Hawthorn finish bottom 4 just to highlight the charade in its entirety. Only problem with that is there's no way the Hawks will repay the favour to us this year for our shithouse trade we made with them late no doubt under a handshake agreement...

You call that trade shithouse? Got us MacCredie, Polson and Kerr; one of three has already debuted, with Polson pressing to follow.

Honestly, even if none of them had played yet, I'd be saying that trade was too soon to call as a success or a failure, but on the face of how things sit currently, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Aphrodite]

They have a lot of money tied up in Goldy, tough spot they're in as Preuss looks more than handy. Majak could be an option with a later pick I spose.

No just no SLC.

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Your talking about the outcome not the actual trade itself, I thought it was poor and along with many many others were convinced we did it to help them out and the favour would be repaid this year.

Don't let the outcome cloud your senses, we'll see in a couple of years if our players turn out as good as we hoped and then look at what others post the pick we swapped have done.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

No just no SLC.

I did say I spose

Can't say I'm enthusiastic about it, more a last resort as Phillips insurance if MK went & no one else was available.

 

[F_therest]

I wouldn't even waste a rookie spot on Majak. He's not up to it.

Yep, doesn't have the footy IQ required in today's game.

Footy IQ > Pure athletes

 

[Malifice]

You call that trade shithouse? Got us MacCredie, Polson and Kerr; one of three has already debuted, with Polson pressing to follow.

Honestly, even if none of them had played yet, I'd be saying that trade was too soon to call as a success or a failure, but on the face of how things sit currently, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

We traded GWSs 2nd round pick (a pick at around pick 40 after academy picks and FA compo) for 3 later picks last year.

Those picks were used on Mcreadie, Williamson and Kerr.

One of Mcreadie or Williamson alone (based on limited exposed form) makes that deal a massive win for us. Both those players look like 10 year A grade players for us.

2 x A graders and a speculative later pick on Kerr for pick 40? Yes please!

 

[bluemahogany]

Your talking about the outcome not the actual trade itself, I thought it was poor and along with many many others were convinced we did it to help them out and the favour would be repaid this year.

Don't let the outcome cloud your senses, we'll see in a couple of years if our players turn out as good as we hoped and then look at what others post the pick we swapped have done.

That pick 36 will likely be around 40 after compo picks and what not, so we traded pick 40 for pick 47 as well as 59 and 65, as well as getting an extra year of development into them and you're calling it a bad trade? How?

 

[Aphrodite]

I did say I spose

Can't say I'm enthusiastic about it, more a last resort as Phillips insurance if MK went & no one else was available.

I know you did but he really has shown nothing and not even a last resort in my opinion.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

I know you did but he really has shown nothing and not even a last resort in my opinion.

No it is then

 

[Malifice]

Your talking about the outcome not the actual trade itself, I thought it was poor and along with many many others were convinced we did it to help them out and the favour would be repaid this year.

Don't let the outcome cloud your senses, we'll see in a couple of years if our players turn out as good as we hoped and then look at what others post the pick we swapped have done.

Dude it was pick 40 odd for picks 48, 66 and 70.

When you're delisting 15 players you need more picks for replacements.

The fact that 2 of those players selected have played already and look (based on limited exposed form) as 10 year quality players just makes that trade a massive win for us.

Have you considered that in addition to needing extra picks in order to fill 15 list positions following delisting, SOS may have had players in mind going into the draft?

 

[Smegger]

I know you did but he really has shown nothing and not even a last resort in my opinion.

So is that a maybe?

 

[Aphrodite]

No it is then

You bet!

So is that a maybe?

No means NO

 

[HARKER]

We can complain about all sorts of things but pining over the pick we gave GWS for Macreadie, Williamson, Polson/Kerr ( we don't really know who we would have taken had have we not had the extra pick) cannot seriously be one of them.

Who would have we got with that pick ~#40 this year? Who knows? Who cares?...........and if it's just luck we got who we got?........no it's not.

 

[LordLucifer]

From the sounds of it will looks like will be looking to trade our future first for Hopper and Smith from GWS.

Where did this "the sound of it/it looks like" come from ??

 

[Malifice]

Where did this "the sound of it/it looks like" come from ??

Barrass said were into both. If we convince them to come then our future 1st is the most logical starting point for a trade.

 

[LordLucifer]

In 2018 and 2019 we should be targeting free agents heavily.

How can you be so categoric about that when no-one, including the people at the club, have any guideline as to how strong or weak our list will be then ??

There may be no need to go down the Free Agency path if all of our drafting & player development comes up trumps resulting in a list full of young tyros who are blitzing it.

 

[LordLucifer]

Barrass said were into both. If we convince them to come then our future 1st is the most logical starting point for a trade.

I don't agree that our future first rounder is a "logical starting point" because IMO, trading future picks is fraught with danger.

 

[Gethelred]

We traded GWSs 2nd round pick (a pick at around pick 40 after academy picks and FA compo) for 3 later picks last year.

Those picks were used on Mcreadie, Williamson and Kerr.

One of Mcreadie or Williamson alone (based on limited exposed form) makes that deal a massive win for us. Both those players look like 10 year A grade players for us.

2 x A graders and a speculative later pick on Kerr for pick 40? Yes please!

Exactly.

 

[DangerousD]

We then go into 2018 without a first round draft pick, but with Ben Silvagni available as a father son, and a massive warchest for free agents.

In 2018 and 2019 we should be targeting free agents heavily.

We could then trade our future 2019 1st for a 2018 1st.

 

[Robertio]

This year we must trade Gibbs, Casboult and perhapsKreuzer.
We need to get a first round for Gibbs. This year you'd take a third round as well. We need a second round for Casboult.
Ideally we have our first round, Adelaide's first round, somebody's second round, Adelaide's third round and our own third round. I'm guessing Kreuzer would get us a second round.
We must keep our pick in the first round. I'd love Hopper plus a pick for Adelaide's first.
We need to then recruit a ruck to replace Kreuzer. Longer?

Gibbs for Hopper sounds OK, but I am in the lets keep the big No 8 club.