2018 Trade Hypotheticals (opposition supporters post here)

[WhiteLionFeva]

Sounding more and more like Neale walks at the end of next year anyway, best Freo will get in compo from that is 1 PP, maybe after their first if the contract is big enough. Seriously, our first round this year plus anything else, no matter how small, is more. He might be contracted, but if Freo want to keep him an extra year they will lose value. He is a good player, but he ain't no Dayne Beams or Chris Judd.

So that would be pick 5 or GTFO?

 

[Hollow Knight]

But still first round , yeah?
Has anyone ever been traded out for 2 first round picks and a player drafted in the first round.

Judd came close but not quite.

And Neale is great, but he’s not Judd.

This Freo poster is clearly drunk. Prefacing a bunch of crap with “The word out West” doesn’t make it smell less like crap We aren’t going to trade out Starc after just extending him. It’s totally contrary to the values the club is building.

And that’s my take, from the East.

 

[SizeMatters]

Really hoping we go hard at FA next season in addition to bringing in Neale and possibly Wallis. Looking at our list I'm just wary that an injury to Beams. Martin or Zorko will drag us back to bottom 3 finish in 2k19. Need to add decent players in the 24-27 years age group ASAP.

 

[Fatcat08]

Really hoping we go hard at FA next season in addition to bringing in Neale and possibly Wallis. Looking at our list I'm just wary that an injury to Beams. Martin or Zorko will drag us back to bottom 3 finish in 2k19. Need to add decent players in the 24-27 years age group ASAP.

Free agent list next year isn't great. Shiel, Coniglio and Haynes from gws about the best. Wingard too.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Free agent list next year isn't great. Shiel, Coniglio and Haynes from gws about the best. Wingard too.

Haynes would be fantastic. Perfect for us.

 

[a mayes ing]

Haynes looks like a Patful clone to me, would really like him here.

 

[Elixuh]

As a complete hypothetical what would people prefer for Neale - this years first and second OR this years second and next years first and second?

 

[mick1013]

As a complete hypothetical what would people prefer for Neale - this years first and second OR this years second and next years first and second?

Next years first, but freo wont accept it.

 

[cheekyLionsFan]

Next years first, but freo wont accept it.

would do next year 1st 2nd and this years 3rd

 

[Tom14]

As a complete hypothetical what would people prefer for Neale - this years first and second OR this years second and next years first and second?

It's a good question. I think I'd prefer the latter on the basis that I expect us to improve so the first round pick would be later. Plus in the NFL future picks tend to be devalued as currency by a round (obviously there is a time value in selecting a player that year rather than waiting a year to make a pick, so a future 2 is seen as equivalent to a current 3). So that deal looks like 3ish second round picks and we get to make a pick in the top 5 (Rankine!).

Freo won't do it though unfortunately.

 

[Gadzorks]

It's a good question. I think I'd prefer the latter on the basis that I expect us to improve so the first round pick would be later. Plus in the NFL future picks tend to be devalued as currency by a round (obviously there is a time value in selecting a player that year rather than waiting a year to make a pick, so a future 2 is seen as equivalent to a current 3). So that deal looks like 3ish second round picks and we get to make a pick in the top 5 (Rankine!).

Freo won't do it though unfortunately.

Lol agree. Can't see freo saying here have our (potential) BnF and clearance specialist, jump up the table and then pay us your first. No one thinks we are staying the same or going backwards next year.

 

[briztoon]

As a complete hypothetical what would people prefer for Neale - this years first and second OR this years second and next years first and second?

As others have mentioned, I don't believe Freo will accept future picks. They'll either want our 2018 first and second picks. Or our 2018 first round pick + a young player, which you would hope the Lions say no to straight away.


If we do want to get back in to the draft, we could consider trading our 2019 second round pick. But we know that Noble has said he does not like trading future picks. I believe it will be very hard for us to trade our 2019 second round pick for a pick in the top 30 of this years draft.

Depending on how many picks Gold Coast receive in compensation, trades and hand outs from the AFL, their current pick 29 might be available to trade for. I certainly believe their two 3rd round picks will be traded.

Sydney's first round pick might be getable, but they'll want pick/points back in this years draft, so you would imagine that would take our second round pick and third round pick.


If it was possible, we could try for two trades before we traded for Neale.

Trade 1. Brisbane's 2018 2nd & 3rd round picks to Sydney for Sydney's 2018 first round pick.

Trade 2. Brisbane's 2019 2nd & 2018 4th round picks to Gold Coast current 2018 pick 29 & 41.

Trade 3. Brisbane's 2018 1st round pick + the second round pick acquired from Gold Coast pick 29 to Fremantle for Lachie Neale.

Brisbane get Neale, pick 13 and 41.

If only it was that simple.

 

[dlanod]

Plus in the NFL future picks tend to be devalued as currency by a round (obviously there is a time value in selecting a player that year rather than waiting a year to make a pick, so a future 2 is seen as equivalent to a current 3).

That devaluation is seen as an opportunity by the smarter teams in the NFL who regularly trade out of picks to get a better pick the following year, i.e. following that thinking isn't a good thing.

 

[Tom14]

That devaluation is seen as an opportunity by the smarter teams in the NFL who regularly trade out of picks to get a better pick the following year, i.e. following that thinking isn't a good thing.

Of course, but generally those who have been successful at doing that have had already established rosters (e.g. the Patriots and the Packers) with continuity in key positions. I'd say the bigger issue rather than the devaluation itself is NFL GMs with shaky job security going crazy with trading picks. There was a great grantland piece about 4 years ago that listed all the stupid trades GMs had made with Bill Belichick that illustrated how you can of course take that thinking way too far.

Having said all of that I'm firmly pro trading out of picks to get multiple good future selections in most circumstances, even noting the devaluation.

 

[dlanod]

generally those who have been successful at doing that have had already established rosters (e.g. the Patriots and the Packers) with continuity in key positions

It's a Catch 22 - are they successful so they can do it, or they are successful because they do it (and other smart things like it)? Browns have generated a lot of draft value from it in the last couple of years despite definitely not having an established roster, so we'll see how that pays off.

 

[Tom14]

It's a Catch 22 - are they successful so they can do it, or they are successful because they do it (and other smart things like it)? Browns have generated a lot of draft value from it in the last couple of years despite definitely not having an established roster, so we'll see how that pays off.

At the end of the day, if you can't pick and develop players it doesn't matter how little or how much draft capital you have! Hopefully the Browns can turn it around although I doubt they can while Hue Jackson is still their head coach.

 

[bungwahl]

As others have mentioned, I don't believe Freo will accept future picks. They'll either want our 2018 first and second picks. Or our 2018 first round pick + a young player, which you would hope the Lions say no to straight away.


If we do want to get back in to the draft, we could consider trading our 2019 second round pick. But we know that Noble has said he does not like trading future picks. I believe it will be very hard for us to trade our 2019 second round pick for a pick in the top 30 of this years draft.

Depending on how many picks Gold Coast receive in compensation, trades and hand outs from the AFL, their current pick 29 might be available to trade for. I certainly believe their two 3rd round picks will be traded.

Sydney's first round pick might be getable, but they'll want pick/points back in this years draft, so you would imagine that would take our second round pick and third round pick.


If it was possible, we could try for two trades before we traded for Neale.

Trade 1. Brisbane's 2018 2nd & 3rd round picks to Sydney for Sydney's 2018 first round pick.

Trade 2. Brisbane's 2019 2nd & 2018 4th round picks to Gold Coast current 2018 pick 29 & 41.

Trade 3. Brisbane's 2018 1st round pick + the second round pick acquired from Gold Coast pick 29 to Fremantle for Lachie Neale.

Brisbane get Neale, pick 13 and 41.

If only it was that simple.

I think Sydney would be unlikely to entertain that type of pick trade this year. You can only take the same number of picks to the draft as you have open list positions. For Sydney, that's typically 3 open spots. We already have two 2nd rounders this year, so adding a third only really makes sense if we plan to on-trade it.

Downgrading our first for 2nd + 3rd rounders (assuming we had enough open list spots) leaves us exposed to an expected early bid for Nick Blakey, which would effectively wipe the value of two of those 2nd rounders and push the third back towards the third round. Keeping our first means we'd cover most of the value of an early bid, drop a bit of value from one 2nd rounder, but then keep the other 2nd round pick to use in the draft.

 

[briztoon]

I think Sydney would be unlikely to entertain that type of pick trade this year. You can only take the same number of picks to the draft as you have open list positions. For Sydney, that's typically 3 open spots. We already have two 2nd rounders this year, so adding a third only really makes sense if we plan to on-trade it.

Downgrading our first for 2nd + 3rd rounders (assuming we had enough open list spots) leaves us exposed to an expected early bid for Nick Blakey, which would effectively wipe the value of two of those 2nd rounders and push the third back towards the third round. Keeping our first means we'd cover most of the value of an early bid, drop a bit of value from one 2nd rounder, but then keep the other 2nd round pick to use in the draft.

Out of curiosity, how many senior list spots do you usually run with?

 

[bungwahl]

Out of curiosity, how many senior list spots do you usually run with?

Typically we only draft the required 3 players, though we usually operate with a list of 38 players. That means we take a max of 5 picks to the draft.

I do think we'll be very active this year, but from all reports our #1 goal is to try to get a pick early enough in the first round to draft someone prior to a bid coming for Blakey. I suspect that's a smoke screen and our actual goal may be to target a ready made player and have another crack at the flag whilst Buddy is still around.

 

[SizeMatters]

Look to trade our first to the Crows 2 X 2st rounders somehow. That will hopefully force Freo hand to just accept pick 4 as a straight swap.

 

[Mitchell54]

As a complete hypothetical what would people prefer for Neale - this years first and second OR this years second and next years first and second?

Cant trade both your future 1st and 2nd. Part of AFLs future trading rules so that 2nd scenario is off the cards. The only way that could be done was if the Dayne Beams rumours were true(which is unlikely) and you get a future 1st from that trade.

Saw you guys talking about a rumour of Lincoln McCarthy from Geelong. Saw him play and thought he had some talent.Hasn't been able to get a game but believe he could be a solid player for Brisbane.

 

[Elixuh]

Cant trade both your future 1st and 2nd. Part of AFLs future trading rules so that 2nd scenario is off the cards. The only way that could be done was if the Dayne Beams rumours were true(which is unlikely) and you get a future 1st from that trade.

That is just a technicality ok.

 

[spotthedog1]

Cant trade both your future 1st and 2nd. Part of AFLs future trading rules so that 2nd scenario is off the cards. The only way that could be done was if the Dayne Beams rumours were true(which is unlikely) and you get a future 1st from that trade.

Saw you guys talking about a rumour of Lincoln McCarthy from Geelong. Saw him play and thought he had some talent.Hasn't been able to get a game but believe he could be a solid player for Brisbane.

I thought the point of that was to prevent teams from constantly trading away future picks. Part of the "must have X number of picks in the first round over Y years". I don't think anyone could debate that we've used first rounders recently. We had 3 just last year.

 

[Mitchell54]

I thought the point of that was to prevent teams from constantly trading away future picks. Part of the "must have X number of picks in the first round over Y years". I don't think anyone could debate that we've used first rounders recently. We had 3 just last year.

It’s a different rule unrelated to the one about 1sts over an X amount of years.

You can trade on or all of your 2nd, 3rds etc or your 1st but not both unless you replace it.

I don’t like the restriction they’ve put on future trading but it’s the rules.

 

[dlanod]

I thought the point of that was to prevent teams from constantly trading away future picks. Part of the "must have X number of picks in the first round over Y years". I don't think anyone could debate that we've used first rounders recently. We had 3 just last year.

That is the point, but it's separate from the "must have two first round picks over four years" rule.