List Mgmt. 2017 Trade & FA Targets Part 1

[Rors]

Yeah we need the really high-end talent ideally and you're more likely to find that in the first few picks.

If we don't get a trade to suit & our picks are something like 6 & 11, would you trade up further or just use those picks?

I'd be keen to do something like picks 6, 11 & 47, for 3 & 14 (like what Sydney did last year with 14 & 17 (& 31) becoming 9 & 19 (& 49))

 

[aussierulesrules]

If we don't get a trade to suit & our picks are something like 6 & 11, would you trade up further or just use those picks?

I'd be keen to do something like picks 6, 11 & 47, for 3 & 14 (like what Sydney did last year with 14 & 17 becoming 9 & 19)

Yeah that could definitely work but it's hard to say this far out, as it may just be that there are 6 we really really like and then another 4 or 5 that we really like and we might want to make sure we get one from each of those batches, rather than getting one from the first and risk missing out on one from the 2nd.

I quite highly doubt that we'll still have them both by draft night tho. Hard to see us not landing someone good with a trade with all our cap space and picks, unless we really stink up the year.

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

If Hawthorn finish in the bottom 6 then I would hope we keep that pick and go to the draft regardless of what happens.

Caveat: the only players I would use that pick for would be Fyfe or Kelly but even then I would hope we would get Fyfe as a FA

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

Yeah that could definitely work but it's hard to say this far out, as it may just be that there are 6 we really really like and then another 4 or 5 that we really like and we might want to make sure we get one from each of those batches, rather than getting one from the first and risk missing out on one from the 2nd.

I quite highly doubt that we'll still have them both by draft night tho. Hard to see us not landing someone good with a trade with all our cap space and picks, unless we really stink up the year.

Ideally go to the draft with the Hawthorn pick and use the other two picks in trades along with FA - that is the definition of killing the trade period. Make it happen Trout, Ameet and the team!!!

 

[Rors]

Yeah that could definitely work but it's hard to say this far out, as it may just be that there are 6 we really really like and then another 4 or 5 that we really like and we might want to make sure we get one from each of those batches, rather than getting one from the first and risk missing out on one from the 2nd.

I quite highly doubt that we'll still have them both by draft night tho. Hard to see us not landing someone good with a trade with all our cap space and picks, unless we really stink up the year.

Spot on.

I just like the idea of keeping the picks to add to more discussion throughout the year.

The free agent talk is always the same names. Then add Lever/Kelly/Whitfield talk.

Someone with potential trade currency, that needs to really lift this year, is Dmac. Could easily see him being on table at years end if he continues to only get 12-18 touches a week at Sandy & struggle to crack into the emergencies & bench spots for us

Sounds harsh but that's the reality with where we're at I feel

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

Spot on.

I just like the idea of keeping the picks to add to more discussion throughout the year.

The free agent talk is always the same names. Then add Lever/Kelly/Whitfield talk.

Someone with potential trade currency, that needs to really lift this year, is Dmac. Could easily see him being on table at years end if he continues to only get 12-18 touches a week at Sandy & struggle to crack into the emergencies & bench spots for us

Sounds harsh but that's the reality with where we're at I feel

You raise an interesting point: who is potentially trade bait and who would be moved on - either delisted to get picked up elsewhere or moved on for something like a 3rd or 4th round pick.

One of ITK's did raise this months ago that some fringe players would have to be moved on and players would look to go elsewhere for opportunity

 

[Rors]

If Hawthorn finish in the bottom 6 then I would hope we keep that pick and go to the draft regardless of what happens.

Caveat: the only players I would use that pick for would be Fyfe or Kelly but even then I would hope we would get Fyfe as a FA

Would happily give up 2017 & 2018 1sts for Kelly with GWS's 2nd coming back too (ball park pick 34-36).

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

Would happily give up 2017 & 2018 1sts for Kelly with GWS's 2nd coming back too (ball park pick 34-36).

That's exactly what I'd pay too, (the Adam Treloar deal as precedence). Keep one 1st for a gun mid and grab a free agent and it's been yet another superb trade/draft period for the Saints!!

 

[Rors]

That's exactly what I'd pay too, (the Adam Treloar deal as precedence). Keep one 1st for a gun mid and grab a free agent and it's been yet another superb trade/draft period for the Saints!!

Kelly
Rockliff
Top 5 draft kid

#winning

 

[VDS66]

The easter bunny is true though.

Nah, he was stabbed by Santa. On instructions from the tooth fairy...

 

[St Neil]

Re Kelly

Let's say we have picks 3 & 10 this year & next years first & second rounders to trade with. What would GWS get in return?

Do we trade pick 10 & next years first?

Or do we trade pick 3 & next years second?

I reckon it would take either of the above scenarios

In such a scenario, I think we would hang on to pick 3 for dear life.

We need more top end talent and the odds of drafting such talent is significantly higher with a top 5 pick. No way should a pick as early as pick 3 be traded away.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[Mowman]

In such a scenario, I think we would hang on to pick 3 for dear life.

We need more top end talent and the odds of drafting such talent is significantly higher with a top 5 pick. No way should a pick as early as pick 3 be traded away.

But that's just my opinion.

But Kelly is TOP end talent and will give us 10 years service

 

[Sir Skid]

Kelly
Rockliff
Top 5 draft kid

#winning

Sold. Close thread

 

[St Neil]

But Kelly is TOP end talent and will give us 10 service

That's right, but it comes down to price.

In my view GWS would take pick 10 (2017) and a 1st RDP from 2018 (which we hope would be pick 18) with a 2018 2nd RDP coming back.

Yes, GWS may demand pick 3 from 2017. But if we held firm and didn't cave in to their demands then the trade would still get done.

At the end of the day it is still a trade and it must be 'at value'. Pick 3 is too valuable for us to trade away. We've only drafted two top 10 draft picks over the past decade.

 

[gringo2011]

That's right, but it comes down to price.

In my view GWS would take pick 10 (2017) and a 1st RDP from 2018 (which we hope would be pick 18) with a 2018 2nd RDP coming back.

Yes, GWS may demand pick 3 from 2017. But if we held firm and didn't cave in to their demands then the trade would still get done.

At the end of the day it is still a trade and it must be 'at value'. Pick 3 is too valuable for us to trade away. We've only drafted two top 10 draft picks over the past decade.

So far we haven't nailed them either.

 

[bergholt]

You raise an interesting point: who is potentially trade bait and who would be moved on - either delisted to get picked up elsewhere or moved on for something like a 3rd or 4th round pick.

Not many worth decent picks who we'd be happy to lose, by my guess:

10-20: McCartin
10-25: Carlisle, Gresham, Steven
15-30: Billings, Hickey
20-40: Armitage, Bruce, Longer, Membrey, Newnes, Ross, Steele
30-50: Acres, Dunstan, Geary, Roberton, Savage
40-60: Battle, Goddard, Long, Webster, Weller
65+: Holmes, McKenzie, Stevens, Wright
no value: Connellan, Coughlan, Freeman, Joyce, Lonie, Marshall, Minchington, O'Kearney, Phillips, Piece, Rice, Sinclair, White

 

[Mowman]

That's right, but it comes down to price.

In my view GWS would take pick 10 (2017) and a 1st RDP from 2018 (which we hope would be pick 18) with a 2018 2nd RDP coming back.

Yes, GWS may demand pick 3 from 2017. But if we held firm and didn't cave in to their demands then the trade would still get done.

At the end of the day it is still a trade and it must be 'at value'. Pick 3 is too valuable for us to trade away. We've only drafted two top 10 draft picks over the past decade.

So we could have another Billings or we could have Kelly.
And by the way I'm playing Devil's advocate I think Billings will be a very good player for us, but if we get a chance to land Kelly who we know what we are getting I hope we pull the trigger

 

[St Neil]

So far we haven't nailed them either.

We will.

In 10 years time both lads will be lauded.

McCartin will take time. But he'll make it. Have patience.

As for Billings, he is a skilled and mercurial small forward. He is not, and will never be, a midfielder. Play the lad in the forward line and just let him play. He'll bob up and change games with team lifting goals or worry the daylights out of opposition defenders.

I remember some of the terrific games Billings has played as a small forward and he should be just left there. I'm not against him getting an occasional role through the middle but that's not where is he is suited.

Of course I'm not an expert. But I don't understand why sometimes players aren't left in positions where they will play their best football.

 

[bergholt]

That's right, but it comes down to price.

In my view GWS would take pick 10 (2017) and a 1st RDP from 2018 (which we hope would be pick 18) with a 2018 2nd RDP coming back.

Yes, GWS may demand pick 3 from 2017. But if we held firm and didn't cave in to their demands then the trade would still get done.

At the end of the day it is still a trade and it must be 'at value'. Pick 3 is too valuable for us to trade away. We've only drafted two top 10 draft picks over the past decade.

"At value"? He was drafted at pick 2 and since then has shown he's one of the best mids in a very good AFL side. His "value" is much higher than pick 10.

 

[gringo2011]

Not many worth decent picks who we'd be happy to lose, by my guess:

10-20: McCartin
10-25: Carlisle, Gresham, Steven
15-30: Billings, Hickey
20-40: Armitage, Bruce, Longer, Membrey, Newnes, Ross, Steele
30-50: Acres, Dunstan, Geary, Roberton, Savage
40-60: Battle, Goddard, Long, Webster, Weller
65+: Holmes, McKenzie, Stevens, Wright
no value: Connellan, Coughlan, Freeman, Joyce, Lonie, Marshall, Minchington, O'Kearney, Phillips, Piece, Rice, Sinclair, White

Bruce is no superstar but He'd be in the 10 to 20 group, key forwards are gold and he's very solid, better delivery he's probably a 60 goal a year FF. Weller and Acres would both get lots of interest too. Roberson would be a early second rounder with his skill set. Jack Steven would get a 10 to 20. I reckon Mc Cartin would be around pick 20 on potential but not higher.

 

[St Neil]

So we could have another Billings or we could have Kelly.
And by the way I'm playing Devil's advocate I think Billings will be a very good player for us, but if we get a chance to land Kelly who we know what we are getting I hope we pull the trigger

I think we are in furious agreement, but my point is we don't cave in to the price that the trading partner demands.

Pick 3 for GWS is just another bloody 1st RDP that they continue to rack up year after year. Whereas, for us they are like gold.

We keep pick 3 in such a scenario. Bugger them. It's important for us. But we have other collateral that could get the deal done and we trade fairly and responsibly to achieve it. If we put an electric fence around pick 3 then we can still do the deal.

Maybe I'm just a pig headed negotiator. So I know others will disagree.

 

[St Neil]

"At value"? He was drafted at pick 2 and since then has shown he's one of the best mids in a very good AFL side. His "value" is much higher than pick 10.

Two first round draft picks?

 

[gringo2011]

We will.

In 10 years time both lads will be lauded.

McCartin will take time. But he'll make it. Have patience.

As for Billings, he is a skilled and mercurial small forward. He is not, and will never be, a midfielder. Play the lad in the forward line and just let him play. He'll bob up and change games with team lifting goals or worry the daylights out of opposition defenders.

I remember some of the terrific games Billings has played as a small forward and he should be just left there. I'm not against him getting an occasional role through the middle but that's not where is he is suited.

Of course I'm not an expert. But I don't understand why sometimes players aren't left in positions where they will play their best football.

They might but they might not still. We really don't have any kids that look definite 200 game top 10 in the team yet. Gresham, Acres, Billings, Mc Kenzie, Goddard etc are all promising rather than definite. I'm hopeful still. But I thought Siposs would make it when he was promising. Last week Billings and Mc Cartin were the worst players on the ground against the worst team from last year.

 

[gringo2011]

So we could have another Billings or we could have Kelly.
And by the way I'm playing Devil's advocate I think Billings will be a very good player for us, but if we get a chance to land Kelly who we know what we are getting I hope we pull the trigger

Or we could nail our two first rounders this year and next years and have 3 guns and Kelly could break a leg and never play again in his first game. It's not set in stone.

 

[St Neil]

They might but they might not still. We really don't have any kids that look definite 200 game top 10 in the team yet. Gresham, Acres, Billings, Mc Kenzie, Goddard etc are all promising rather than definite. I'm hopeful still. But I thought Siposs would make it when he was promising. Last week Billings and Mc Cartin were the worst players on the ground against the worst team from last year.

Absolutely. Nothing is certain. None of our young players are assured of success.

Hanging on to a low pick like pick 3 could also be a bust.

I just genuinely believe both Billings and McCartin will make it and that we are likely to draft a really good player with an early draft pick.

Time will tell.