Prediction 2018 trade hypothetical thread

[Taylor]

The gamble is whether he would cost more than that should he choose to come home and play for Adelaide if he starts his career at Brisbane or Carlton.

 

[Flags_In_The_Bag]

Absolutely. McGovern is contracted for the next two years. We would value him at a first and second round pick, minimum. If you think someone would give all of that up, just to move nine spots in the draft then I don't know what to say.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Wow. Do I have to say it again. By all reports Mitch wants out, and if that's true then you would rather keep him on the list and not get a high skilled kid that wants to play for you in Rankine? As I said, wow

 

[Shaz2012]

The gamble is whether he would cost more than that should he choose to come home and play for Adelaide if he starts his career at Brisbane or Carlton.

Luko won’t come home. We know that. It doesn’t change the fact that there is a limit to what we would give up for 1 player. The top end of this draft is pretty strong. Would we rather have two A grade goal kicking mids that can give good service to Fogarty and perhaps a lesser KPF? or have B graders delivering to Fogarty and Luko?

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Wow. Do I have to say it again. By all reports Mitch wants out, and if that's true then you would rather keep him on the list and not get a high skilled kid that wants to play for you in Rankine? As I said, wow

Even if it’s true he wants out, thats no reason for us to accept massive unders for him.

 

[Flags_In_The_Bag]

Even if it’s true he wants out, thats no reason for us to accept massive unders for him.

Unders? If acquiring Rankine, will not be unders.

 

[Hammer time 2018]

Then let me comment on the deals individually.

1. Horrendous. Giving up McGovern to move nine picks is insane.

2. This is pretty much the equivalent of three firsts and a second for pick one. I think that's a disaster.

McGovern, right now, is worth roughly a first and a second.

So, to get two players who may or may not work out, you've traded the equivalent of five firsts and two seconds.

You may slightly disagree with my value, but it still is a shocker of a deal.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

I agree, bulldogs would be wining big with the first deal, Especially if Adelaide don't do a deal for pick 1.

The second deal doesn't work for Carlton or Adelaide. Adelaide would be giving up too much and Carlton wouldn't be getting what they want either. Carlton would want to trade pick 1 for a player/ players that can make an immediate impact. If they want to attract free agents or established gun players they need to win more, not wait around and hope some of their picks develop into good players. Getting more established players in will also help speed up the grown of the younger players.

 

[Drewie11]

Then let me comment on the deals individually.

1. Horrendous. Giving up McGovern to move nine picks is insane.

2. This is pretty much the equivalent of three firsts and a second for pick one. I think that's a disaster.

McGovern, right now, is worth roughly a first and a second.

So, to get two players who may or may not work out, you've traded the equivalent of five firsts and two seconds.

You may slightly disagree with my value, but it still is a shocker of a deal.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

1. We basically change Mitch for Rankine. Perhaps it is pick 19 and McGovern for pick 5 then.

What would you give up to get pick 1?

 

[PAFC_1870]

McGovern, right now, is worth roughly a first and a second.

Not in this draft and after this season.

Last year I'd agree.

 

[Mego Red]

Wow. Do I have to say it again. By all reports Mitch wants out, and if that's true then you would rather keep him on the list and not get a high skilled kid that wants to play for you in Rankine? As I said, wow

There's ample ways we could get into a position to draft Rankine. We'd maybe even look at a McGovern for pick five to guarantee it.

But we not giving McGovern away for less than his worth as he's contracted for the next two years, so if anything we'd demand overs. It's a professional league and players can overcome these kinds of problems - just look at Gibbs.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[Mego Red]

Not in this draft and after this season.

Last year I'd agree.

Then he stays with the Crows. Easy.

He's only just been resigned so we're in no rush to trade him.

Plus, supposedly one of the issues is around the delays in re-signing Tom Lynch, and that's all been solved so if anything he has reasons to want to stay.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[Mego Red]

1. We basically change Mitch for Rankine. Perhaps it is pick 19 and McGovern for pick 5 then.

What would you give up to get pick 1?

For pick one? I'd give up McGovern and the Melbourne pick.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[philthy05]

For pick one? I'd give up McGovern and the Melbourne pick.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Why would Carlton (or another team) want to come away from a super (in terms of top several picks) draft with 2 good players instead of 1 great one?

Answer

They won’t

 

[_007_]

First and second for McGovern? Laughable.

 

[Mego Red]

First and second for McGovern? Laughable.

Why possibly would the Crows trade a tall forward contested marking beast who is contracted for the next two years?

He'll stay.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Mego Red]

Why would Carlton (or another team) want to come away from a super (in terms of top several picks) draft with 2 good players instead of 1 great one?

Answer

They won’t

Because Lukosius is a risk. Because they've had plenty of first picks and they're still rebuilding. Because they have multiple areas to fill. Because McGovern is the only guaranteed good player in that transaction. Because recently key forwards drafted early have all been busts.

McGovern is a better contested mark than Lukosius. Is better defensively. Has proven his talent.

Lukosius looks like he'll have a big tank, is great by foot and 5cm taller.

Blues could get the guaranteed player who can deliver immediately and a first round pick.

Or not - that's fine too.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Peel67skin]

Because Lukosius is a risk. Because they've had plenty of first picks and they're still rebuilding. Because they have multiple areas to fill. Because McGovern is the only guaranteed good player in that transaction. Because recently key forwards drafted early have all been busts.

McGovern is a better contested mark than Lukosius. Is better defensively. Has proven his talent.

Lukosius looks like he'll have a big tank, is great by foot and 5cm taller.

Blues could get the guaranteed player who can deliver immediately and a first round pick.

Or not - that's fine too.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Because Crows want over and everybody being Tight as...

 

[philthy05]

Because Lukosius is a risk. Because they've had plenty of first picks and they're still rebuilding. Because they have multiple areas to fill. Because McGovern is the only guaranteed good player in that transaction. Because recently key forwards drafted early have all been busts.

McGovern is a better contested mark than Lukosius. Is better defensively. Has proven his talent.

Lukosius looks like he'll have a big tank, is great by foot and 5cm taller.

Blues could get the guaranteed player who can deliver immediately and a first round pick.

Or not - that's fine too.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Lol

So they should play ultra safe just to give you what you want? Very pliable logic.


Trade your first pick to Carlton for a player whose level you know because it’s less risk than drafting right?

Btw, I’ve watched Lukosius and I would pick him in a game tommorow over Mitch much less considering his career

 

[Apex36]

Lukosious is the least risky tall forward prospect I’ve ever seen. Already performing against men in the SANFL, he’ll end up being the next N Reiwoldt imo.

 

[_007_]

Why possibly would the Crows trade a tall forward contested marking beast who is contracted for the next two years?

He'll stay.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

If he wants to leave the Crows will trade him. It's the done thing. If he is anything like every other player to break a contract, he will nominate a state or a specific club of choice. The Crows will then proceed to be reamed or opt to keep a player that doesn't want to play for them on their list. Not many examples of the latter occurring but plenty of the former.

 

[Flags_In_The_Bag]

Then he stays with the Crows. Easy.

He's only just been resigned so we're in no rush to trade him.

Plus, supposedly one of the issues is around the delays in re-signing Tom Lynch, and that's all been solved so if anything he has reasons to want to stay.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

No, the reasons were what they said they couldn't pay him then signed Gibbs for more.

 

[adammania9]

Is Jack Hombsch just bad or being pushed out by Jonas, Clurey and Howard? I thought he was a very reliable defender up until this year where he’s been playing SANFL every week unless one of the above three is out.

Wouldn’t mind him at Collingwood.

 

[Crow till I die]

Unders? If acquiring Rankine, will not be unders.

For a straight swap if it were possible, I think we might do that. But it would not be possible to do that

 

[Crow till I die]

First and second for McGovern? Laughable.

pick 2 for weller...laughable (oh..it actually happened!)

 

[Crow till I die]

Why would Carlton (or another team) want to come away from a super (in terms of top several picks) draft with 2 good players instead of 1 great one?

Answer

They won’t

what if the melbourne pick ended up being used with a later pick to secure Gaff? they get the top end mid in the age demographic they want and they get a strong marking fast forward that can also play in defense. Not saying they would do it, but there are other options for the 1st round pick that would go with mcgovern in the hypothetical deal mentioned. What about if by Mitch going there it helped get Jeremy under Free agency? Al lI am saying is that it is not so cut and dried what could happen

 

[Flags_In_The_Bag]

pick 2 for weller...laughable (oh..it actually happened!)

what's laughable about that? he does not

For a straight swap if it were possible, I think we might do that. But it would not be possible to do that

Sorry i would like him at my club but in all honesty he ain't worth a pick 5,6 or 7 in this draft, you will say then we keep him but by all reports he is disgruntled so good luck with that.