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

[blue shark]

Some may have been negative about Robertson's kicking, certainly the rest of his game is very good and his kicking matches or better than others in the top ten.

But some interesting stats on mids kicking efficiency re the Robertson 52.9%, Serong 48%,Flanders 47.9, Anderson 50%, Rowell 62.9%, Schoenberg (inside gem) 63.4, Green 51.3, Bianco (another gem) 70.2 Maginniss 45%

The lower numbers for mids probably because of kicking from out of congestion? Other positions.......

Young 75% Ash 70.6 Rivers 69.8%
Sharp 60% Stephens 52.4% Day 79.5% 53.6%
Henry na Weightman 55.9% Pickett 55.6%

Bergman 52.8% C Stephens na

That's the issue though isn't it? Kicking percentage goes down in congestion so handball, kick to outside players
On the move that can kick elite with time and space.
It's what the governing body wants to enforce, and why half backs, wing are now the quarterbacks.
Under Lyon that dinky handball, blind kick forward was trench warfare, an arm wrestle.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

 

[Lach72]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

So you effectively get Langdon for a bag of chips?

 

[Taylor]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

What about 8 for our 2020 first?

Then it's essentially a three way switch where North, Melbourne and Freo have rolled their firsts around.

 

[Danny82]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

I’d do that trade if you send us back 2020 3rd round. Mainly to guarantee we get 2 of Robertson, Stephens, ash, young and don’t have to go for serong or Kemp, who Melbourne might be ok with at 10.

 

[Alfonz]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

Extortion to try and get yourselves Langdon for nothing. GTFO. How about we just wait and call your bluff. Then we get your "good" option, plus still have a 2020 second rounder. Am perfectly happy to split 10 if we need to, still better than letting Melbourne bend us over.

 

[Lach72]

 

[Danny82]

Haha my opinion wasn’t popular on the Melbourne trade!

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

So you effectively get Langdon for a bag of chips?

I guess. You could give us your 2020 second instead if it makes it feel better.

What about 8 for our 2020 first?

Then it's essentially a three way switch where North, Melbourne and Freo have rolled their firsts around.

*italian chef's kiss*

Only problem with this is if Carlton bid at 9 you use 10 on Henry anyway.

I’d do that trade if you send us back 2020 3rd round. Mainly to guarantee we get 2 of Robertson, Stephens, ash, young and don’t have to go for serong or Kemp, who Melbourne might be ok with at 10.

Yeah I think it's win-win. As much as I like Young I'd prefer Kemp to all four of those players, and Serong to Robertson/Stephens/Ash.

 

[Taylor]

Only problem with this is if Carlton bid at 9 you use 10 on Henry anyway.

We could trade our 2020 first to Melbourne for #8, then pick #10 and a later pick for #9.

Go to the draft pick #7, #8 and #9 with Henry to follow. Not bad.

 

[Lach72]

We could trade our 2020 first to Melbourne for #8, then pick #10 and a later pick for #9.

Go to the draft pick #7, #8 and #9 with Henry to follow. Not bad.

Why would Melbourne trade 8 for 2020 round 1

 

[Lach72]

What if this? 8 for 10 and 22? Henry bid after 8 we use all our late picks? Do we have enough?

Trade back in with GC or Geelong? round one 2020 for 17 and 24? or 17 and 36 even?

 

[Lach72]

If GC can't squeeze a top ten out of anyone for 15 and 20 I reckon they'd take our 2020 rd1

 

[Lach72]

What if this? 8 for 10 and 22? Henry bid after 8 we use all our late picks? Do we have enough?

Trade back in with GC or Geelong? round one 2020 for 17 and 24? or 17 and 36 even?

Ha maybe I like Gysbert's suggestion better after all...

If we could do it the subsequent deals

 

[Taylor]

Why would Melbourne trade 8 for 2020 round 1

If they rate us as bottom three or four then they would have basically traded their first next year for a top four pick.

 

[eastfreo75]

If GC can't squeeze a top ten out of anyone for 15 and 20 I reckon they'd take our 2020 rd1

Love to do that trade.

Need to wait to after the Henry bid.

 

[Bender571]

Thoughts on 8 for 10 and our 2020 second rounder back?

Would allow you to get ahead of a Henry bid and match with 22 and later picks.

So you get for example Robertson, Stephens and Henry instead of Robertson, 2020 second rounder, Henry, and whatever's left after you split 10 if a bid comes at 8 or 9.

It's not an unfair trade considering the benefit getting ahead of a NGA bid, but it is a bit unpalatable considering the Langdon trade and the scent of extortion hanging in the air.

With the rumours that Adelaide want McAsey we could do a similar trade with them for pick 6 and it would feel a lot better, even though we end up with the same players.

Considering the possibility that a bid won't come before 10, the chance to trade when a bid comes, and the number of potential good WA players in the 15-25 range i think we should probably pass on that offer.

 

[Lach72]

Hawks' plan set in motion, and could a top-4 talent slide to Blues?

Cal Twomey and Riley Beveridge answer all of the big draft questions live on Facebook

www.afl.com.au

 

[Eski3]

Twomey seems to agree with the Herald Sun guys that it looks like Adelaide are seriously considering McAsey

 

[charlie34]

Hawks' plan set in motion, and could a top-4 talent slide to Blues?

Cal Twomey and Riley Beveridge answer all of the big draft questions live on Facebook

www.afl.com.au

Some interesting thoughts by Cal around Young being potentially available at our pick and us not getting back in after a Henry bid. So much to play out on the night.

 

[rgauci]

Some interesting thoughts by Cal around Young being potentially available at our pick and us not getting back in after a Henry bid. So much to play out on the night.

cant be bothered listening to him, any chance for a quick summary?

 

[wahooo]

I'm happy to recognise that we need some speed and skill on the outside but unlike other posters I'm not so convinced on our inside mid stocks. Many have been quick to recognise question marks over the outside options and I agree.

But, Valente hasn't played a game at Afl level and has been bogged down with injury, definitely should have question marks over him. Cerra has the potential but if we're to be realistic he needs to make a big jump. Blakely is a solid contributor but no world beater. Acres is in a similar boat to Blakely, hard to assess him seeing as he's been played out of position. And Conca isn't a long term option, solid lock down player but ideally you'd only want him rotating through there. Mundy's getting on and I think most would agree we don't want Walters getting beat up on the inside for four quarters.

I feel that many posters are over rating our inside stocks, the picture isn't overly rosy, we're all holding out for Blakely to increase his tank, Cerra to lift etc. Losing Neale was a massive loss and a bloke like Robertson is a walk up round 1 replacement if he gets his shoulder right. We'd be mad to pass on Robertson, let's stop relying on someone to get fit or bulk up or develop and just do the smart thing and pick Robertson.

We'll hopefully get 2 picks in before Henry, one can be spent on Robertson and another used to address our needs for speed and skill. Henry will also add speed and skill on the outside, it's a good start for one draft.

 

[Purple Suit]

Some interesting thoughts by Cal around Young being potentially available at our pick and us not getting back in after a Henry bid. So much to play out on the night.

I hope he's right and we don't sell off next years draft. That costs a premium while banking picks the following draft gets you more currency. Probably a 20-40% uplift but there is always a risk in the top end 1st rounders. If a team had picks in the bank, they could always pay it forward to following draft and cash in the 20-40% premium every year.

In theory, if all our major targets are gone by pick 10 and a Henry bid hasn't happened, we could maybe trade it to GC for pick 20 + 2020 pick 11. We then have a bank of draft currency that we then use every to pay some forward for the premium but also improve our draft. Rich people usually have money in the bank and don't live off credit.

 

[blue shark]

I'm happy to recognise that we need some speed and skill on the outside but unlike other posters I'm not so convinced on our inside mid stocks. Many have been quick to recognise question marks over the outside options and I agree.

But, Valente hasn't played a game at Afl level and has been bogged down with injury, definitely should have question marks over him. Cerra has the potential but if we're to be realistic he needs to make a big jump. Blakely is a solid contributor but no world beater. Acres is in a similar boat to Blakely, hard to assess him seeing as he's been played out of position. And Conca isn't a long term option, solid lock down player but ideally you'd only want him rotating through there. Mundy's getting on and I think most would agree we don't want Walters getting beat up on the inside for four quarters.

I feel that many posters are over rating our inside stocks, the picture isn't overly rosy, we're all holding out for Blakely to increase his tank, Cerra to lift etc. Losing Neale was a massive loss and a bloke like Robertson is a walk up round 1 replacement if he gets his shoulder right. We'd be mad to pass on Robertson, let's stop relying on someone to get fit or bulk up or develop and just do the smart thing and pick Robertson.

We'll hopefully get 2 picks in before Henry, one can be spent on Robertson and another used to address our needs for speed and skill. Henry will also add speed and skill on the outside, it's a good start for one draft.

You are forgetting Tucker, Banfield, Acres, we really need that dual inside/outside player, and if Robertson can do that then
Otherwise Stephens, Young, can.

 

[wahooo]

You are forgetting Tucker, Banfield, Acres, we really need that dual inside/outside player, and if Robertson can do that then
Otherwise Stephens, Young, can.

Did mention Acres. I prefer Tucker on the wing, I know that's not always a popular opinion but he'll be good inside or out, still could have better than him. I like Banfield but all I'll say is he looks good for Peel doesn't he

I was trying to suggest we need to stop over rating our inside stocks.

Would love both Young and Stephens to fall to our picks but that's unlikely. One of those two with Robertson and Henry would be my ideal draft with maybe trading back in for Sharp.