2017 trade hypothetical thread

[SterlingArcher]

How about Gold Coast trade 2017 pick #24 and 2018 3rd rounder for Anthony Miles.
GC still have their first 3 picks plus an experienced ball accumulating inside midfielder. Richmond get early enough pick to assist with Naish points and another pick in next years "strong" draft.

Also think we may be able to get a 2018 3rd rounder from Carlton for Ben Lennon. Would be more suited to the slower methodical style of Carlton than the frenetic pace of the Tigers.

I think the fact these guys are uncontracted in mid-September and coming off basically full years in the VFL (while younger guys get full seasons in the AFL) means their value is worth little.

Pick 40-50 for Miles, pick 50-60 for Lennon. Yes Both are relatively talented and indicative of Richmonds new found depth, but neither would draw much at the trade table.

 

[jakefooty23]

Neither is Taberner and Balic worth much. Wouldn't do those 2 for 32 alone

Tabener and Balic won't be 29 at the start of next season. Just because Stratton has won some flags doesn't mean he has trade value, the only value he has is as a veteran mentoring a team's younger players. Hes well past it, wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. As for you not trading 32 for Balic and Tabener, you'd be dumb not to accept that trade. Considering the fact that James Cousins was your best first year player... I think you could use all the youth you can get...

 

[SumTingWong]

Miles is about a pick 50-60 if you are lucky. Even GC are not that moronic.

We got pick 40 for Angus Graham. By that deal Miles is worth pick 3.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

We got pick 40 for Angus Graham. By that deal Miles is worth pick 3.

And the angus graham deal was stupid. Doubt lightning strikes twice there.

 

[HeHateMe]

Then don't do it . You are happy to keep Stratton and Freo are happy to keep Tab and send to Balic to other team .

This is VERY likely to happen.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[SCRAY72]

What would a team have to to trade to get both Libba & Stringer?

If you ask Dogs supporters picks 5 and 6. If you ask others, second or third rounders.
Bigfooty regulations.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Stringer is a solid first rounder, Libba is so hard to gauge, he hasn't been the same since his injury really. If you could guarantee you could get him back to his best, two firsts plus a pick back your way would be fairly fair.

 

[adammania9]

Stringer is a solid first rounder, Libba is so hard to gauge, he hasn't been the same since his injury really. If you could guarantee you could get him back to his best, two firsts plus a pick back your way would be fairly fair.

For Liberatore? Surely not

 

[LukeParkerno1]

For Liberatore? Surely not

As I said it depends if you feel you can get him back to his best. His best is close to AA level. People forget how good he was prior to injury.

 

[adammania9]

As I said it depends if you feel you can get him back to his best. His best is close to AA level. People forget how good he was prior to injury.

He was pretty awesome but that was even before Stringer was AA! Personally, I'm not even sure I'd give a first rounder, he's proven to be a great pressure midfielder but they can be found in a lot of places. Libba is tough to assess, but I wouldn't think he's worth more than Stringer.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

He was pretty awesome but that was even before Stringer was AA! Personally, I'm not even sure I'd give a first rounder, he's proven to be a great pressure midfielder but they can be found in a lot of places. Libba is tough to assess, but I wouldn't think he's worth more than Stringer.

Would depend on your team. Some would need Stringer more some would need Libba

 

[anotherletdown]

Stringer is a solid first rounder, Libba is so hard to gauge, he hasn't been the same since his injury really. If you could guarantee you could get him back to his best, two firsts plus a pick back your way would be fairly fair.

Stringer is a middling first rounder, I'll agree with that..... but Libba? He's shown nothing of value since the injury and there are plenty of questions marks around commitment and other things. Not worth anything better than pick 30ish. I think it was floated on the Sydney board... or maybe it was another site.... anyway, Hannebery and Sydney's 2nd for Libba and the dogs 1st

 

[telsor]

And the angus graham deal was stupid. Doubt lightning strikes twice there.

That was second lightning strike.

The same club (crows) had gifted us a rather nice trade for Tambling not long before.

 

[telsor]

As a trade Hypothetical...

Richmond's 2 first rounders do some travelling.

Richmond trades 15&17 to Melbourne for 10&27
Melbourne on trades them to Adelaide for Lever. (providing the required 2 firsts')
Adelaide trades them to Carlton for Gibbs (again, '2 firsts')
Carlton, out of habit, on trades them to GWS for whoever is surplus up there this year.

 

[Topkent]

As a trade Hypothetical...

Richmond's 2 first rounders do some travelling.

Richmond trades 15&17 to Melbourne for 10&27
Melbourne on trades them to Adelaide for Lever. (providing the required 2 firsts')
Adelaide trades them to Carlton for Gibbs (again, '2 firsts')
Carlton, out of habit, on trades them to GWS for whoever is surplus up there this year.

I'd do that 15 and 17 deal for sure. What do the Tigers get out of it?

 

[BLERN]

I'd do that 15 and 17 deal for sure. What do the Tigers get out of it?

10 and 27

 

[King Patty]

Essendons pick 11
for Stringer and 27

 

[Topkent]

10 and 27

But why would they be happy with that if the Crows aren't happy with 10 and 27 originally. It satisfies the two firsts by definition I suppose

 

[BLERN]

But why would they be happy with that if the Crows aren't happy with 10 and 27 originally. It satisfies the two firsts by definition I suppose

I cant see crows fans being happy with it either tbh. Was just pointing out what the tigers were getting in that hypothetical trade.

 

[telsor]

I'd do that 15 and 17 deal for sure. What do the Tigers get out of it?

I think a problem Richmond has is that we're looking at Naish as a FS, but he's likely to be just after our firsts, and we don't exactly have a lot of points to pay for him (picks 50, 52 & 71 IIRC which wouldn't be enough is he goes early 20s), so securing a later pick would be useful, and if we can do that by shifting one of our firsts up, then bonus. (the point values of 15/17 & 10/27 are about the same BTW)

Of course, the more likely scenario is we do so with a trade for someone like Miles for pick 30-odd which would do the job, but hey, it's a hypothetical thread.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

As a trade Hypothetical...

Richmond's 2 first rounders do some travelling.

Richmond trades 15&17 to Melbourne for 10&27
Melbourne on trades them to Adelaide for Lever. (providing the required 2 firsts')
Adelaide trades them to Carlton for Gibbs (again, '2 firsts')
Carlton, out of habit, on trades them to GWS for whoever is surplus up there this year.

Adelaide won't trade 2 firsts for gibbs. The rest of it is plausible though.

 

[telsor]

hello.

i here on 5aa that miles from tigers will come to port adelaide. should we pick him for jarman impey?

thank you

Why the hell would Richmond want a small forward?

 

[Mitchell54]

Why the hell would Richmond want a small forward?

Agreed. Richmond have an abundance of small forwards. Jackson Trengove possibly involved?

 

[Topkent]

I think a problem Richmond has is that we're looking at Naish as a FS, but he's likely to be just after our firsts, and we don't exactly have a lot of points to pay for him (picks 50, 52 & 71 IIRC which wouldn't be enough is he goes early 20s), so securing a later pick would be useful, and if we can do that by shifting one of our firsts up, then bonus. (the point values of 15/17 & 10/27 are about the same BTW)

Of course, the more likely scenario is we do so with a trade for someone like Miles for pick 30-odd which would do the job, but hey, it's a hypothetical thread.

Haha no chance you get 30 for miles. He's a reserves player for you he would move on for a token pick

 

[telsor]

Adelaide won't trade 2 firsts for gibbs. The rest of it is plausible though.

I figure they're late enough that they're only technically '2 firsts', so it's a way of giving them what they want without actually giving all that much.

Mind you, I think what gets paid would probably factor in salary, so if Adelaide pays overs, Carlton would probably be chipping in a bit of their cap