Mega Thread 2019 List Management, Free Agency & Trade thread #2

[Van_Dyke]

Brandon Matera - Had a good year... any more upside?

His upside is probably a full year of his season up until the Melbourne game. He worked best when we still had competent tall forwards but once Hogan/Lobb/Tabs all went down he was mediocre. Think if he has at least 1 or 2 of those guys next to him he could have a 35-40 goal season

 

[wayToGo_]

"We desperately need more players who can kick goals!"... Matera kicks 30 goals (as many or more than every WC small forward)... "We should delist Matera"

Nice work Freo fans.

 

[Docker82]

Yeah, imagine having small forwards and players who are quick.

Can't wait for West Coast to get rid of their short people like Rioli, Ryan, Cameron, Cripps and Petreculle.

Pettucelle 185cm
Cripps 183cm
Cameron 182cm
Ryan 179cm
Switkowski 179cm
Walters 178cm
Crowden 176cm
Rioli 175cm
Matera 175cm
Colyer 175cm
Giro 175cm

West Coast’s short people are much taller than ours - rating the guys mentioned tallest to shortest only Rioli is in amongst our players.

 

[Docker82]

Would


Give me a Giro any day over Banfield, Crowden types.

Giro has some sideways movement which buys him time (note, unsure how he goes now with the knee).

But agree with most in that we have too many D graders.

You're hopeful one of Crowden, Banfield, North, Giro 'make it' but the reality is they probably won't.

When you actually process our list... those under 190cm don't make for pleasant reading.

In order of age and under 190cm:
Stephen Hill - Injury riddled
Michael Walters - Gun
Travis Colyer - Meh
Brandon Matera - Had a good year... any more upside?
Nathan Wilson - Need to bring back his flare
Ethan Hughes - Can probably carry one of these types... not 4. I don't mind him, but think he'll be forced out.
Brett Bewley - Worth persisting with.
James Aish - I'll give him 4 games before I turn on him. Not confident.
Luke Ryan - Gun
Connor Blakely - Where to for this bloke?
Sam Switkowski - One of those... can only carry one of players. Henry should take his spot.
Darcy Tucker - We've been harsh on him. Only 22. That said needs to take that next step up this year.
Lachlan Schultz - Can only carry one of these types. He's about the 3rd I've mentioned.
Bailey Banfield - As above.
Tom North - Not ideal being outside the top 36 in your squad.
Stefan Giro - ACL. Who knows?
Mitchell Crowden - Has an innate ability to get caught HTB. Honest trier. Can only carry one of these types
Adam Cerra - Needs a step up and defined role.
Andrew Brayshaw - Developing nicely. Next ball magnet IMO.
Jason Carter - Developing nicely.
Luke Valente - Needs a nice year. By nice, a few games of AFL and consistent WAFL.
Sam Sturt - As above.

That doesn't really make pleasant reading.

In what world is Switkowski in the category of ‘can only carry one of these types’ and Bewley is ‘worth persisting with’.

Do people actually watch our players play or just look at stats?

Switkowski will still be on our list in four years time, Bewley won’t be this time next year - he’s a dud.

I guess the only thing I can say is the other ‘can only carry one of these types’ is that they’ll be gone by 2021 as well.

The crazy thing is Richmond won a premiership with a least 2-3 of these guys playing...

 

[Taylor]

Have a look at some of the clearance work from Switta in the Geelong game when he is near the ball.

There's something to work with there.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Agree on Switta, he’s very much ahead of the Schultz and Colyer group.

Elite pressure, terrific disposal over 40m but needs to hit the scoreboard more. Hopefully that comes with having a couple of our top 4 KPFs on the field. Sean Darcy was our sole KPP in the forward half for the last 6 weeks remember...

 

[Deeluded]

You are wrong about how the points system works. In your hypothetical, if you bid at 6, pick 7 will be chewed up but we’ll keep 10 and have no influence on our future first. There is a discount for selecting an academy player.

I can’t see GWS trading a future 1st and 6 for pick 3.

He’s not the best small forward, Serong and Flanders have him covered, both potentially play midfield too.

You know this stuff far better than me but I'm not sure if you fully understood what I said. I'll go through each point one by one.

1. In the hyperthetical if we (Melbourne) bid 6 (from GWS) on Henry, your 7 is chewed up and you still have 10 to work with. But if you had traded 7 and 10 with our 6 (plus whatever GWS else gives us), you use your later pick in the 20s on Henry and get to pick your other player at 6 rather than 10. This might make little difference or a big difference - depending on who you're after. Yes you miss out on the pick in the 20s as it's used on Henry, but you'd get GWS's first rounder for next year or whatever we get from them (which will probably have a similar value to your 20s pick this year).

2. I think GWS would trade a future 1st and 6 for 3. Why? Because in having 3, for them is essentially having two top 5 picks. They get the 3rd best player and Greene who would go 3-5 by most draft experts estimations. If they do not trade for 3, then they will have to use 6 yo match Sydney (pick 5?) to get Greene - thus only one top 5 pick. Who knows where they will finish next year, but you would think they will be in the 8 and likely top 4, in a reportedly compromised draft (due to academies and father sons), their first pick could be the equivalent of in the 20s next year. If you were them what would you rather?

3. I've only seen a few highlights of each so I'm not an expert, but from what I've read and seen, (and this is being very picky) Serong doesn't have the pace or elite skills we're looking for - he's also short and fairly solid so maybe has a lower ceiling than other prospects. Flanders similarly lets himself down a bit with his kicking (admittedly maybe the highlights i've seen are not representative). They're both excellent prospects and may end up stars of the game, but we don't need players who can also play inside mid, we need the outside flare and class - esp as a small forward. If there's a player that offers this better than Henry let me know cos I don't know of one. The fact that people think we'll draft weightman (rated around 15-28) at pick 8 is an indication of how bad we're crying out for small forwards.

So if it were up to me, I would be trying to do these deals for the dees. If they couldn't be done with Freo I would nominate Henry at 6 (that's how much we need a player of his ilk).

Having said that, given his connection with freo with the academy, the freo indigenous players and that his family are all based in WA, I'd feel conflicted if I had to make that choice... but in terms of what is best for Melbourne I would be picking him at 6 (assuming we trade with GWS).

I feel like the logic is sound - but I might misunderstand how the bidding system works. Interested in your thoughts

 

[Dockernut]

Have a look at some of the clearance work from Switta in the Geelong game when he is near the ball.

There's something to work with there.

An understatement. He’s so clean and tough for a little fella I’ve wondered at times whether it’d be worth playing him in the guts.

 

[Cobbler]

In what world is Switkowski in the category of ‘can only carry one of these types’ and Bewley is ‘worth persisting with’.

Do people actually watch our players play or just look at stats?

Switkowski will still be on our list in four years time, Bewley won’t be this time next year - he’s a dud.

I guess the only thing I can say is the other ‘can only carry one of these types’ is that they’ll be gone by 2021 as well.

The crazy thing is Richmond won a premiership with a least 2-3 of these guys playing...

Happy for you go over my posts if you wish. I’m a massive advocate of Switkowski. He is my favourite of the can carry only one of these types.

Bewley has a great kick and hence my comment. When I say worth persisting with I didn’t necessarily mean at AFL level as in gifted games, but seeing as he’s only had one year he isn’t exactly going to be delisted.

If we have a team which has more than two of:
Colyer, Switkowski, Hughes, Crowden, Schultz, Banfield, Giro etc then we’re in for a world of pain. NONE of these guys walk into anyone else’s top 22... so why should they walk into ours?

 

[Van_Dyke]

Agree on Switta, he’s very much ahead of the Schultz and Colyer group.

Elite pressure, terrific disposal over 40m but needs to hit the scoreboard more. Hopefully that comes with having a couple of our top 4 KPFs on the field. Sean Darcy was our sole KPP in the forward half for the last 6 weeks remember...

Combined with him getting a full preseason and bigger tank etc I’m positive about Switta. Hopefully with a full pre-season he’s set for a big 2020. Could well become one of our most underrated very quickly

 

[se17enteen]

Luke Ryan is gonna get PAID!!!!!!

And he will deserve every cent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eastfreo75]

You know this stuff far better than me but I'm not sure if you fully understood what I said. I'll go through each point one by one.

1. In the hyperthetical if we (Melbourne) bid 6 (from GWS) on Henry, your 7 is chewed up and you still have 10 to work with. But if you had traded 7 and 10 with our 6 (plus whatever GWS else gives us), you use your later pick in the 20s on Henry and get to pick your other player at 6 rather than 10. This might make little difference or a big difference - depending on who you're after. Yes you miss out on the pick in the 20s as it's used on Henry, but you'd get GWS's first rounder for next year or whatever we get from them (which will probably have a similar value to your 20s pick this year).

2. I think GWS would trade a future 1st and 6 for 3. Why? Because in having 3, for them is essentially having two top 5 picks. They get the 3rd best player and Greene who would go 3-5 by most draft experts estimations. If they do not trade for 3, then they will have to use 6 yo match Sydney (pick 5?) to get Greene - thus only one top 5 pick. Who knows where they will finish next year, but you would think they will be in the 8 and likely top 4, in a reportedly compromised draft (due to academies and father sons), their first pick could be the equivalent of in the 20s next year. If you were them what would you rather?

3. I've only seen a few highlights of each so I'm not an expert, but from what I've read and seen, (and this is being very picky) Serong doesn't have the pace or elite skills we're looking for - he's also short and fairly solid so maybe has a lower ceiling than other prospects. Flanders similarly lets himself down a bit with his kicking (admittedly maybe the highlights i've seen are not representative). They're both excellent prospects and may end up stars of the game, but we don't need players who can also play inside mid, we need the outside flare and class - esp as a small forward. If there's a player that offers this better than Henry let me know cos I don't know of one. The fact that people think we'll draft weightman (rated around 15-28) at pick 8 is an indication of how bad we're crying out for small forwards.

So if it were up to me, I would be trying to do these deals for the dees. If they couldn't be done with Freo I would nominate Henry at 6 (that's how much we need a player of his ilk).

Having said that, given his connection with freo with the academy, the freo indigenous players and that his family are all based in WA, I'd feel conflicted if I had to make that choice... but in terms of what is best for Melbourne I would be picking him at 6 (assuming we trade with GWS).

I feel like the logic is sound - but I might misunderstand how the bidding system works. Interested in your thoughts

I totally agree with Serong and Flanders.

Unless you keep pick 3, we will match the bid on Henry.

Not sure how bidding on Henry will help you,unless you have picks 6 and 8?

Go home factor would be huge as Henry have bonded with Walters and co.

Better for you guys to keep pick 3 and get Young.

We won't trading 22 for later picks until we have pick 10 and if Henry hasn't got a bid.

 

[Docker82]

Happy for you go over my posts if you wish. I’m a massive advocate of Switkowski. He is my favourite of the can carry only one of these types.

Bewley has a great kick and hence my comment. When I say worth persisting with I didn’t necessarily mean at AFL level as in gifted games, but seeing as he’s only had one year he isn’t exactly going to be delisted.

If we have a team which has more than two of:
Colyer, Switkowski, Hughes, Crowden, Schultz, Banfield, Giro etc then we’re in for a world of pain. NONE of these guys walk into anyone else’s top 22... so why should they walk into ours?

I disagree... Switkowski, Hughes and Giro don’t belong in the same discussion as Colyer, Crowden, Schultz. Banfield probably doesn’t either but he’s limited in what role he can play for the side.

I disagree massively on Bewley - I saw nothing to suggest he’s even an above average kick. He’s exactly like Danyle Pearce - nice looking kicking action and can kick it a long way but hardly ever hits a meaningful target. He’s slow for a winger too. Contracts aside he’d be the second player on our list currently I’d dump after Colyer. I try to be positive about most of our players but he is absolutely awful.

 

[mike91]

I think the career of Giro could be fairly compared with that of Ed Langdon.
Ed was drafted 2014
2015 - 2 games
2016 - 13 games
2017 - 10 games
2018 - 21 games
2019 - 22 games

Taking him until his fourth year to be a best twenty two player. That's the year after next for Giro.

Ed Langdon isn't aiming at super high levels for a footballer but if he were performing similarly in the second year of his contract extention (year after next) then I'd consider that quite handy depth.

It should also show how long it can take the outside runners to get up to speed.

A left footed Ed Landgon isn't great, it's not terrible either. I don't think I've ever seen Stefan miss the ball with his foot.
I have been looking back over the games from this year and took extra note of Langdon in the Geelong game. I'm not sure he hit a target... all game, by hand or foot.

Matera is best twenty two, he is one of the best crumbing smalls on our list, Matera, Walters and McCarthy are the three players who can kick a goal on a whim from an angle with zero point zero amount of time.

Schutlz keeps writing cheques his body can't cash with flashy kicks that do not come off.

I think the career of Giro could be fairly compared with that of Ed Langdon.
Ed was drafted 2014
2015 - 2 games
2016 - 13 games
2017 - 10 games
2018 - 21 games
2019 - 22 games

Taking him until his fourth year to be a best twenty two player. That's the year after next for Giro.

Ed Langdon isn't aiming at super high levels for a footballer but if he were performing similarly in the second year of his contract extention (year after next) then I'd consider that quite handy depth.

It should also show how long it can take the outside runners to get up to speed.

A left footed Ed Landgon isn't great, it's not terrible either. I don't think I've ever seen Stefan miss the ball with his foot.
I have been looking back over the games from this year and took extra note of Langdon in the Geelong game. I'm not sure he hit a target... all game, by hand or foot.

Matera is best twenty two, he is one of the best crumbing smalls on our list, Matera, Walters and McCarthy are the three players who can kick a goal on a whim from an angle with zero point zero amount of time.

Schutlz keeps writing cheques his body can't cash with flashy kicks that do not come off.

Seriously? Comparing Giro to Langdon? Not even close. Langdon always had potential, Giro is fast, fit and that is it.

Langdon is also a back to back top 5 b&f. Giro is highly likely to be delisted in the next 2 years. Upgrading him fits in perfectly with our stupid list management over the years.

 

[showemhowtorock]

Agree on Switta, he’s very much ahead of the Schultz and Colyer group.

Elite pressure, terrific disposal over 40m but needs to hit the scoreboard more. Hopefully that comes with having a couple of our top 4 KPFs on the field. Sean Darcy was our sole KPP in the forward half for the last 6 weeks remember...

Switta is our Brent Daniels, so important to the team despite not kicking many.. you never know just like Brent the one Switta nails could be the one that takes his team to a prelim

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

I feel a lot of our depth players were exposed to look worse than they actually are when we were getting hit significantly with injuries. I don't think there's anything wrong individually with Giro, Bewley, Schultz, etc. But too many of them in the side at once is always going to cause issues.

agree with your point and probably the draft selections and picks were related with the past coach and our circumstances.

Might get hung drawn and quartered for this but many of the criticism of the selection of the so called non best 22 players are shallow in the sense of most picks in a given year are part of a strategy across a number of forthcoming drafts. Some years you have good picks some years you don't have much.

For example...we could bust getting into extra picks by using most of our 2020 picks and get 5 to 6 picks in the top 25. Before the 2020 year is out (or mid 21) most of that six, if the picks are sound, would likely be close to best 22. Then 2020 draft we would in trouble with few picks and points to do anything even if we wanted to delist and pick up draft and academy talent.

It is frustrating having to persevere with some ordinariness that might develop but unlikely too per se re those mentioned, but sometimes it is necessary. Tough gig planning lists and getting the balance right I reckon.

 

[Docker82]

I honestly think bad contracts is the main reason Micellef was not looked at favourably.

We were always losing Langdon and Hill really. It sucked but it was reality.

How we managed to sign Hughes, Duman and Giro on long term deals yet spent most of the season trying to re-sign Blakely, Logue and Tucker - three guys who shouldn’t have any reason to think of leaving says something to me.

I don’t exactly want either of the former three off our list but I think it’s quite possible that they fall out of favour completely and barely play a game next year. Add to that contracts that he wasn’t responsible for in Colyer and Crowden and it is a bit of a mess.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

You know this stuff far better than me but I'm not sure if you fully understood what I said. I'll go through each point one by one.


I feel like the logic is sound - but I might misunderstand how the bidding system works. Interested in your thoughts

A lot of thought has gone into the strategy and well done. Just to make these points to you though -

There are other strategy's that Freo may take that don't involve Melbourne and GWS and can deliver a very good outcome for us.

If Henry is bid on early...who knows you might just get the selection you think is a diamond.

Think it is unwise not to rate Serong highly when he is showing both high possession (re his role) and contested possession.Very skilful player.

 

[eastfreo75]

I honestly think bad contracts is the main reason Micellef was not looked at favourably.

We were always losing Langdon and Hill really. It sucked but it was reality.

How we managed to sign Hughes, Duman and Giro on long term deals yet spent most of the season trying to re-sign Blakely, Logue and Tucker - three guys who shouldn’t have any reason to think of leaving says something to me.

I don’t exactly want either of the former three off our list but I think it’s quite possible that they fall out of favour completely and barely play a game next year. Add to that contracts that he wasn’t responsible for in Colyer and Crowden and it is a bit of a mess.

Totally agree.

Best 22 players should always be a priority and be offered long term deals unless it’s an older guy.

Long term deals for non best 22 players doesn’t make sense.

You look at Hawthorn, they have a large number on 1 year deals.

 

[eastfreo75]

A lot of thought has gone into the strategy and well done. Just to make these points to you though -

There are other strategy's that Freo may take that don't involve Melbourne and GWS and can deliver a very good outcome for us.

If Henry is bid on early...who knows you might just get the selection you think is a diamond.

Think it is unwise not to rate Serong highly when he is showing both high possession (re his role) and contested possession.Very skilful player.

Did you see the last two games of the championships?

Serong production was high against SA but a lot of the kicks were bombs from contested possessions. In that game, he had zero hand ball receives and very little linking possessions.

In the WA game, Robertson and Rivers smashed him because they were bigger inside mids. Under pressure his skills goes to pieces.

Sure, he looks great against inferior talent who give him time and space to execute his skills.

Serong spread from the contest isn’t elite and so at 177cm you need to make it your best trait.

Who really wants an 177cm inside mid who isn’t quick?

 

[Scham]

Combined with him getting a full preseason and bigger tank etc I’m positive about Switta. Hopefully with a full pre-season he’s set for a big 2020. Could well become one of our most underrated very quickly

It’d be a big change cause he’s the most overrated atm.

Hopefully with a new coach he’ll be encouraged to be a bit more creative.

 

[kp junior]

Giro is similar physically to Brad Hill. That’s more his ceiling if we’re lucky, rather than Langdon


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Cobbler]

I disagree... Switkowski, Hughes and Giro don’t belong in the same discussion as Colyer, Crowden, Schultz. Banfield probably doesn’t either but he’s limited in what role he can play for the side.

I disagree massively on Bewley - I saw nothing to suggest he’s even an above average kick. He’s exactly like Danyle Pearce - nice looking kicking action and can kick it a long way but hardly ever hits a meaningful target. He’s slow for a winger too. Contracts aside he’d be the second player on our list currently I’d dump after Colyer. I try to be positive about most of our players but he is absolutely awful.

I think they all belong in the same discussion. None of them are walk up best 22, no matter what your opinion is.

They’re simply ahead of the rest of the pack.

Top of head:
Fyfe
Walters
Mundy
Pearce
Hamling
Ryan
Wilson
Logue
Blakely
Aish
Stephen Hill
Acres
Hogan
Taberner
Matera
Lobb
Darcy
Tucker
Brayshaw
Cerra
Conca

That’s 21 blokes top of head.

Hence why you can only bring in one of Hughes, Switkowski etc.

That list doesn’t even contain Sturt or Valente or any of our picks from this year.

So what you’re really arguing is Switkowski, Hughes and Giro are the best of our fringe players? Which I’m not disagreeing with. I’m just saying if they’re all playing? Then we’re crap.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

Did you see the last two games of the championships?

Serong production was high against SA but a lot of the kicks were bombs from contested possessions. In that game, he had zero hand ball receives and very little linking possessions.

In the WA game, Robertson and Rivers smashed him because they were bigger inside mids. Under pressure his skills goes to pieces.

Sure, he looks great against inferior talent who give him time and space to execute his skills.

Serong spread from the contest isn’t elite and so at 177cm you need to make it your best trait.

Who really wants an 177cm inside mid who isn’t quick?

Yes and that was how I first thought of him watching that game and a few other highlights (raving about his marking for a little guy) before doing a lot more work looking across his two years. Can see why a number of the supposed experts (not the mock draft mob) rate him highly.

Not saying he's my first choice our pick but I do rate him.

 

[Clems Knee]

Hi there, I’m a dees supporter but was intrigued as to what you might do in the following situation (given we badly need a small forward I think we’ll do some trading of picks - so was trying to work out what we might do. It’s tough understanding how all the points work!):

We have pick 3 and 8. GWS badly want pick 3 so they don’t have to deal with Sydney bidding on Greene. So we swap pick 3 and 6 and get at least next years first rounder from them as well (in what ppl say will be a compromised draft with father sons and academy players).

We wouldn’t use 3 on Henry... but he is supposedly the best small forward in the draft so 6 is a possibility... and to be honest I’d be wrapped if we could get him.

So knowing that, would you trade 7 and 10 for our pick 6 (originally gws) plus next years first rounder (or whatever we can get from them). Then you pick who you want at 6, don’t have to take Henry till your pick in the 20s and have gws 1st pick in 2020.

I imagine not... but I think if we bid on him at 6, then you would have to take him at 7 so your other pick (10) is later and you don’t get the 1st rounder for 2020. I reckon you will be able to correct me if I’m wrong on the points. I guess it depends on how highly you rate Henry as well - I think he could be an absolute gun!

Don’t think it’s going to happen but we seem to be cooking up something if we want a small forward - we’ve been linked to weightman who isn’t rated as highly as Henry and is meant to be rated 12-25.

Anyway, best of luck with the draft - it sounds like it’s fairly even after the top 2 so we should both snare 2 good young kids. I was hoping our years of taking a keen interest in the draft we’re over for a bit as a Melbourne supporter but it is what it is!

You know this stuff far better than me but I'm not sure if you fully understood what I said. I'll go through each point one by one.

1. In the hyperthetical if we (Melbourne) bid 6 (from GWS) on Henry, your 7 is chewed up and you still have 10 to work with. But if you had traded 7 and 10 with our 6 (plus whatever GWS else gives us), you use your later pick in the 20s on Henry and get to pick your other player at 6 rather than 10. This might make little difference or a big difference - depending on who you're after. Yes you miss out on the pick in the 20s as it's used on Henry, but you'd get GWS's first rounder for next year or whatever we get from them (which will probably have a similar value to your 20s pick this year).

2. I think GWS would trade a future 1st and 6 for 3. Why? Because in having 3, for them is essentially having two top 5 picks. They get the 3rd best player and Greene who would go 3-5 by most draft experts estimations. If they do not trade for 3, then they will have to use 6 yo match Sydney (pick 5?) to get Greene - thus only one top 5 pick. Who knows where they will finish next year, but you would think they will be in the 8 and likely top 4, in a reportedly compromised draft (due to academies and father sons), their first pick could be the equivalent of in the 20s next year. If you were them what would you rather?

3. I've only seen a few highlights of each so I'm not an expert, but from what I've read and seen, (and this is being very picky) Serong doesn't have the pace or elite skills we're looking for - he's also short and fairly solid so maybe has a lower ceiling than other prospects. Flanders similarly lets himself down a bit with his kicking (admittedly maybe the highlights i've seen are not representative). They're both excellent prospects and may end up stars of the game, but we don't need players who can also play inside mid, we need the outside flare and class - esp as a small forward. If there's a player that offers this better than Henry let me know cos I don't know of one. The fact that people think we'll draft weightman (rated around 15-28) at pick 8 is an indication of how bad we're crying out for small forwards.

So if it were up to me, I would be trying to do these deals for the dees. If they couldn't be done with Freo I would nominate Henry at 6 (that's how much we need a player of his ilk).

Having said that, given his connection with freo with the academy, the freo indigenous players and that his family are all based in WA, I'd feel conflicted if I had to make that choice... but in terms of what is best for Melbourne I would be picking him at 6 (assuming we trade with GWS).

I feel like the logic is sound - but I might misunderstand how the bidding system works. Interested in your thoughts

This is a cool approach to list management: threaten to bid on a player above his worth, then offer a trade in your favour so as to avoid the bid. It’s a form of standover tactic.
You’ve done it twice - to both GWS and Freo.

As for your suggested trades:
3 for 6 and future 1st round. It’s well in Melbourne’s favour and only slightly in GWS’s - they would still need to get some later picks back from Melbourne to cover the bid after 3 on Green. Otherwise they would be better served calling your bluff. But Melbourne have nothing outside the top ten until pick 97. Perhaps a future second then. Or third, if GWS are desperate.

The next trade:
6 and GWS’s future 1st for 7 and 10. Again, well in Melbourne’s favour, but if you had to give GWS a second or third rounder in the first deal you wouldn’t be able to trade away GWS’s first (because you don’t have a future first of your own). And even if the deal was possible, what’s to stop you from using standover tactics again with pick 8? This time it would cost pick 22 and later picks. I think it quite likely that Bell would call Mahoney’s bluff (again) that Melbourne wouldn’t really make a bid on Henry. But it’s a risk.

I propose a counter offer: 6, 8 and a future 4th round pick for 7, 10 and a future 2nd pick, along with a promise not to bid for Henry at 7.

Melbourne turn pick 3,8 and future 3rd and 4th rounds into 7, 10 and future 1st and 2nd rounds.
GWS turn Green (pick 6) and future 1st Round into pick 3, Green (bid comes after 3) and future 3rd round
Fremantle turn 7,10 and a future 2nd into 6,8 and future 4th round.

Are all these machinations by Melbourne worth the outcome of downgrading the high draft picks? Possibly; the future picks are much better.