2017 Trade and FA thread

[scoman]

I dont mind the idea of Kennedy or Hooper but using Ports pick. That takes having to worry about having to take Ballendean with our second first rounder and we get a midfielder ready to produce from round one 2018. Although if Ballendean is then bid on in the first round we match with our second and the deficit comes off next years first?

 

[briztoon]

It is a different argument as to whether Hopper is the right player. I personally think he is and believe he's right on track to become an A grade inside mid. I'd be rapt to get a similar player in this year's draft.

In terms of sacrificing the long term for the short term, signing a bloke who has 10 years of senior footy ahead is hardly short sighted.

Wasn't saying it was short sighted. My concern is we miss out on a genuinely elite type talent for the sake of expediting our rebuild.

 

[briztoon]

I dont mind the idea of Kennedy or Hooper but using Ports pick. That takes having to worry about having to take Ballendean with our second first rounder and we get a midfielder ready to produce from round one 2018. Although if Ballendean is then bid on in the first round we match with our second and the deficit comes off next years first?

It would have to be a significant deficit. If we went with the ladder as of the end of the 5th round, Brisbane could match a bid at pick 8 with it's 2nd and 3rd round picks, meaning we would likely walk away from the draft with 2 top draftees, plus either of Kennedy or Hopper (if a trade went ahead) and a 30 point deficit on our 2018 draft pick.

The trade would come down to Kennedy or Hopper basically being worth a 2nd and 3rd round pick, and we draft one less player. Or draft a player at the very back end of the draft because the don't really get used up, but rather shuffle to the back of the draft. At worse we draft an academy kid with that pick who plays out the year in the reserves, then we can rookie list them the year after.

There is a 156 points difference between pick 4 and pick 5, so if we finished 4th bottom, we'd keep the 4th pick, it would just be worth 2004 points, instead of 2034 points.

To put things in to perspective, there is 483 point difference between pick 1 and pick 2. And a 283 points difference between pick 2 and pick 3. It would have to be a significant points differential to see us drop down by more than one pick, or we would have to finish outside the bottom 5 clubs.

 

[theteamtobeat]

We could always trade Schache for Richmond's two 1st round picks. Then we on trade our lowest two 1st round picks for Hopper, Himmelberg and Kennedy. I'm really liking the idea of taking two top 10 picks to the draft, whilst picking up Ballendean, Kennedy, Hopper and Himmelberg via draft/trade.

I like Schache, but to me his the type of player that is good as the supply of ball he's getting. We need a Lynch type player who can win his own ball and has abit of mongrel in him. Schache would be more suited to a team like Adeliade.

 

[carnthemlions]

We could always trade Schache for Richmond's two 1st round picks. Then we on trade our lowest two 1st round picks for Hopper, Himmelberg and Kennedy. I'm really liking the idea of taking two top 10 picks to the draft, whilst picking up Ballendean, Kennedy, Hopper and Himmelberg via draft/trade.

I like Schache, but to me his the type of player that is good as the supply of ball he's getting. We need a Lynch type player who can win his own ball and has abit of mongrel in him. Schache would be more suited to a team like Adeliade.

We should trade our top ten picks for more top ten picks so we can etc.

 

[Big Sauce 21]

Can we afford to get any younger ? We keep feeding in kids every year but the spankings we get and dominance against us is hindering development majorly. Years of irrelevance seems to be continuing.

 

[kylegee28]

Aaron Mullett.

 

[lionraven]

We could always trade Schache for Richmond's two 1st round picks. Then we on trade our lowest two 1st round picks for Hopper, Himmelberg and Kennedy. I'm really liking the idea of taking two top 10 picks to the draft, whilst picking up Ballendean, Kennedy, Hopper and Himmelberg via draft/trade.

I like Schache, but to me his the type of player that is good as the supply of ball he's getting. We need a Lynch type player who can win his own ball and has abit of mongrel in him. Schache would be more suited to a team like Adeliade.

Yes lets write off a second year 19 year old KPP because he doesnt play the same as a 24 year old potential AA KPP or a 26 year old servicable KPP. Yet somehow Richmond will want to pay us 2 first round draft picks this year for this bonafide deep fried spud. Then using those picks (which surely will be enough wont it) we will somehow convince GWS to essentially gift us one of their draft classes and we will be able to convince these guys that we are on the right track despite us just selling our future spine away and finishing bottom again. Hopper and Kennedy will surely not attract any interest down south and will want to play with us for no real reason and Himmelberg will magically show more than Schache despite this guy only play. ing 4 games.

Ive seen so many outlandish posts but this one takes the cake.

Schache is 19 has played 20 games and kicked 19 goals. He has spent most of that time playing in a dysfunctional team with poor delivery. He has also taken the number 1 defender for most of those matches. McCartin is a year older, has 1 more preaseason under his belt, is a number 1 pick, has 2 versatile forwards to play along with one of the all star veterans of the game and with very decent midfield service and yet he also has similar stats (19 games for 19 goals).

I honestly dont get what people expect to happen. GC Lynch played 30 games in his first 2 seasons for 25 goals. It wasnt until his fourth season he broke out with a 40 goal year. Yet here we are already wanting to turf a 19 year old.

I usually dont post but your post really triggered me. Lets just wait on our pitchforks until the young lad actually decides where he wants to play. Im more than happy to sign Schache to a 5 year contract and see what he becomes as a 23 year old. Im sure despite McCartin showing much less than Schache and the abundance of talent, StK will be more than happy to keep McCartin.

Everyone knows KPP take time to develop. Why do we expect Schache to be different? We got lucky with Hipwood. He's an athletic tall so he will outshine the more standard muscley talls in the early stages of their careers because young KPPs rarely have the mass to play strong and have to rely on pace. When both are 23-24 I doubt Hipwood will be that much better than Schache once Schache puts on some muscle and can play more to his strengths - body on body.

 

[jjami15]

Yes lets write off a second year 19 year old KPP because he doesnt play the same as a 24 year old potential AA KPP or a 26 year old servicable KPP. Yet somehow Richmond will want to pay us 2 first round draft picks this year for this bonafide deep fried spud. Then using those picks (which surely will be enough wont it) we will somehow convince GWS to essentially gift us one of their draft classes and we will be able to convince these guys that we are on the right track despite us just selling our future spine away and finishing bottom again. Hopper and Kennedy will surely not attract any interest down south and will want to play with us for no real reason and Himmelberg will magically show more than Schache despite this guy only play. ing 4 games.

Ive seen so many outlandish posts but this one takes the cake.

Schache is 19 has played 20 games and kicked 19 goals. He has spent most of that time playing in a dysfunctional team with poor delivery. He has also taken the number 1 defender for most of those matches. McCartin is a year older, has 1 more preaseason under his belt, is a number 1 pick, has 2 versatile forwards to play along with one of the all star veterans of the game and with very decent midfield service and yet he also has similar stats (19 games for 19 goals).

I honestly dont get what people expect to happen. GC Lynch played 30 games in his first 2 seasons for 25 goals. It wasnt until his fourth season he broke out with a 40 goal year. Yet here we are already wanting to turf a 19 year old.

I usually dont post but your post really triggered me. Lets just wait on our pitchforks until the young lad actually decides where he wants to play. Im more than happy to sign Schache to a 5 year contract and see what he becomes as a 23 year old. Im sure despite McCartin showing much less than Schache and the abundance of talent, StK will be more than happy to keep McCartin.

Everyone knows KPP take time to develop. Why do we expect Schache to be different? We got lucky with Hipwood. He's an athletic tall so he will outshine the more standard muscley talls in the early stages of their careers because young KPPs rarely have the mass to play strong and have to rely on pace. When both are 23-24 I doubt Hipwood will be that much better than Schache once Schache puts on some muscle and can play more to his strengths - body on body.

Mate, well said, you should post more often

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

It is a different argument as to whether Hopper is the right player. I personally think he is and believe he's right on track to become an A grade inside mid. I'd be rapt to get a similar player in this year's draft.

In terms of sacrificing the long term for the short term, signing a bloke who has 10 years of senior footy ahead is hardly short sighted.

I'm not against trading our likely top 3 pick for a player that projects to have a very strong 10+ year career, but it would have to be a pretty special type of player. Someone who's had exposure at AFL level is a far safer drafting/trading strategy.

There are very few Midfielders in the past decade, that have shown enough in a couple of seasons, to command such a high trade value. Off the top of my head I'd only have Selwood, Dusty, Heppell Shiel, Treloar, Wines, Bont, Cripps and Oliver (no doubt there others too, i didn't include Fyfe, as I missed most of his early career) That list also benefited with some hindsight too, a player like Rich would've commanded such a trade value, shows there still risk in the strategy.

I know you weren't discussing Hopper, but the conversation has went that way. I just don't see him in that caliber yet. If you took that pick to the draft, a player with Hoppers projection would be seen as a "pass mark" for mine. There's no doubt a risk you could end up with a lesser player, but every chance you end up with a better player too. I'd have he's trade value lower then our first, a lot closer to ports.

 

[chopperduck]

By default people seem to over value draft picks. Id happily trade a top 10 pick for a player like hopper.

 

[ZoBlitz]

By default people seem to over value draft picks. Id happily trade a top 10 pick for a player like hopper.

Because potential always trumps reality.

 

[jjami15]

By default people seem to over value draft picks. Id happily trade a top 10 pick for a player like hopper.

Hopper was taken pick 6 sooo just saying.

 

[royboys4eva]

Let's be brutally honest the chances of getting someone to our club gets diminished with every loss ( especially floggings) and terrible crowds. Very hard to sell our club to any player right now. You look at the players we have picked up over the last few years and aside from Dayne Beams who wanted to come home for family reasons and Christensen had to get out of Geelong, all we have managed to snare is players looking for a second chance in the AFL. Bastinac, Walker, Frost. Mitch Robinson has been overwhelming and Tom Bell has been underwhelming.

I would love to get a Darcy Parish as much as the next person but it's a dream. The guy gets the chance to play in front of huge crowds week in week out. We got 13k yesterday to our game.

It would be great to recruit a hard bodied 75+ games player to our club who is below the age of 25, but unless their not getting a regular game with their club we haven't got much chance sadly. Maybe Fagan and Noble can sell the club better? But the best way to attract players is to start winning and getting better crowds.

 

[Football Pope]

Let's be brutally honest the chances of getting someone to our club gets diminished with every loss ( especially floggings) and terrible crowds. Very hard to sell our club to any player right now. You look at the players we have picked up over the last few years and aside from Dayne Beams who wanted to come home for family reasons and Christensen had to get out of Geelong, all we have managed to snare is players looking for a second chance in the AFL. Bastinac, Walker, Frost. Mitch Robinson has been overwhelming and Tom Bell has been underwhelming.

I would love to get a Darcy Parish as much as the next person but it's a dream. The guy gets the chance to play in front of huge crowds week in week out. We got 13k yesterday to our game.

It would be great to recruit a hard bodied 75+ games player to our club who is below the age of 25, but unless their not getting a regular game with their club we haven't got much chance sadly. Maybe Fagan and Noble can sell the club better? But the best way to attract players is to start winning and getting better crowds.

I'd rather we worked with what we have... and develop them. Having said that for some weird reason, we seem to lack the ability to bring on talent.. But keeping to what you have said, players like you mentioned, should be used as crash packs and smash type players... not doing us much service in the reserves.. Not sure why Bell isn't used in defense rather than as a forward..and Bastinac as the small mongrel forward rather than a midfielder..

 

[Dylan12]

Shrewd trading by Port giving us their first pick which will likely be in the teens whilst they walk away with the steal of the draft in Powell-Pepper.

 

[briztoon]

By default people seem to over value draft picks. Id happily trade a top 10 pick for a player like hopper.

I would seriously consider trading a pick in the 6 to 10 range for Hopper, if Hopper was willing to come to Brisbane. I would genuinely struggle to trade a top 3 pick for Hopper, especially when there are 3 players "potentially" at the top of the draft who "potentially" could be far superior inside players than Hopper.

One point that hasn't been addressed in this discussion is that we are talking about trading for a player to add midfield depth for next season. Neither Hopper nor anyone else is coming in for the remainder of this season to add much needed midfield support/depth.

By next season, we're going to have another season and pre-season in to Keays and Mathieson, and McCluggage, Berry, Cox and Witherden will have been introduced to the AFL and be better for it and have a full pre-season under their belt. Maybe even Jacob Allison will get a run at the back end of the season.

Add in two more probable top 25 midfield draftees (plus Ballenden), and we hopefully will be looking at some quality depth, albeit young, in the midfield.

Shrewd trading by Port giving us their first pick which will likely be in the teens whilst they walk away with the steal of the draft in Powell-Pepper.

The way I look at the trade with Port, is that we were looking for points to pay for Ballenden, and if Ballenden slides a bit, it gives us a second first round pick.

We brought in 6 draftees and 3 new rookies last draft period (not counting Eagles). That's a lot of new kids to get game time in to.

Powell-Pepper has looked great this season, and there is no denying he's exactly the type of player our side is missing, and this is what is making the trade look questionable, but there was a lot of question marks on Powell-Peppers kicking ability.

I'm quite confident we'll add two quality young mids with two of our first three picks this coming draft. It has been talked up as a good draft for talls, but I will not be surprised if it ends up being more of midfield draft with quite a lot of inside and contested football types and some good fast outside types.

 

[Zhesty]

Don't understand the fuss on Powell-Pepper. He's been good for a first year player but was always coming in as a more developed player. He definitely does some nice things but so did Rich. He's also playing in a strong midfield.

 

[Nunez]

Don't understand the fuss on Powell-Pepper. He's been good for a first year player but was always coming in as a more developed player. He definitely does some nice things but so did Rich. He's also playing in a strong midfield.

Put Berry in SPPs shoes and people would be going nuts about how good he is.

 

[Cockliff38]

The thing is Powell-Pepper is close to, if not already, at his ceiling. Let's revisit this in a few years when Berry is our starting inside mid, Witherden is carving teams off HB and our *insert 2017 Port pick player* is doing stuff

 

[Fitzroy bears]

[QUOTE="briztoon, post: 50000973, member: 168593"The way I look at the trade with Port, is that we were looking for points to pay for Ballenden, and if Ballenden slides a bit, it gives us a second first round pick.

We brought in 6 draftees and 3 new rookies last draft period (not counting Eagles). That's a lot of new kids to get game time in to.

Powell-Pepper has looked great this season, and there is no denying he's exactly the type of player our side is missing, and this is what is making the trade look questionable, but there was a lot of question marks on Powell-Peppers kicking ability.

I'm quite confident we'll add two quality young mids with two of our first three picks this coming draft. It has been talked up as a good draft for talls, but I will not be surprised if it ends up being more of midfield draft with quite a lot of inside and contested football types and some good fast outside types.[/QUOTE]
Couldn't agree more with your assessment, it's worth mentioning too that it wasn't a direct trade either, it was part of the trade that sent hanley to the gold coast so the analysis of any trade should be of the whole deal not the essence of the deal.

 

[briztoon]

Maybe something missed by most people (including me until I looked again).

Port did not pick SPP with our PP pick. Our PP was ontraded to Sydney, who drafted Will Hayward. Port traded picks 9, 19(PP) and 49 to Sydney for picks 14, 17 and 31.

 

[SizeMatters]

Maybe something missed by most people (including me until I looked again).

Port did not pick SPP with our PP pick. Our PP was ontraded to Sydney, who drafted Will Hayward. Port traded picks 9, 19(PP) and 49 to Sydney for picks 14, 17 and 31.

Hayward and battle were two I thought would be absolute bargains last year. Both were my smokies. I wouldn't have minded either way if we done the trade or not at the time, however in hindsight it's looking like a Port win here. Someone has done the calculations and we had to get pick 11 for a break even of sorts. Looks like port will be around that mark as a minimum.

 

[briztoon]

Yeah, I'm thinking between 12 and 14 for Port.

 

[13Beast]

Hayward and battle were two I thought would be absolute bargains last year. Both were my smokies. I wouldn't have minded either way if we done the trade or not at the time, however in hindsight it's looking like a Port win here. Someone has done the calculations and we had to get pick 11 for a break even of sorts. Looks like port will be around that mark as a minimum.

Would be happy with #11. Definitely will be some quality players still available.