List Mgmt. 2019 Trade Thread

[gringo2011]

thinking around 10

I would think we'd want back at least what we paid for him, he's developed to a point that he's ready to go into his prime. If we let him go for less we'd look like morons.

 

[mightymalaka]

Pretty sure coff was always a hbf but even if he wasn’t it’s to early to say he should be part of the midfield. You say it’s the same old midfield but then complain that one of the same old mids is dropped. As for acres well unfortunately he is victim of being able to play other positions. I would like your best midfield when you have time and if that means others are out where do they play.

You really do get caught up in semantics Plugs! It's well documented what i think of Richo's handling of Dunstan and Acres....Dunstan doesn't play enough at the coal face
And Acres doesn't play there at all! As for other mids Obv Steven is in there normally ( not richo's fault )....And Steele plus Ross can all rotate!
The bigger picture i'm on about is to be less predictable and mix it up....Would never have Ross, Steele and Dunstan in there at the same time!
Ideally you would have Steven switching with Gresh...Steele and Dunstan sharing the inside work and for the other outside mid i'd be going
Acres swapping with Clark!
That leaves one of Richo's favourites in quite the quandry.....Everyone knows how i feel, so i'm not going to bag the bloke out once again!

 

[plugger66]

I would think we'd want back at least what we paid for him, he's developed to a point that he's ready to go into his prime. If we let him go for less we'd look like morons.

Has he developed to a pick 3. Not imo.

 

[plugger66]

You really do get caught up in semantics Plugs! It's well documented what i think of Richo's handling of Dunstan and Acres....Dunstan doesn't play enough at the coal face
And Acres doesn't play there at all! As for other mids Obv Steven is in there normally ( not richo's fault )....And Steele plus Ross can all rotate!
The bigger picture i'm on about is to be less predictable and mix it up....Would never have Ross, Steele and Dunstan in there at the same time!
Ideally you would have Steven switching with Gresh...Steele and Dunstan sharing the inside work and for the other outside mid i'd be going
Acres swapping with Clark!
That leaves one of Richo's favourites in quite the quandry.....Everyone knows how i feel, so i'm not going to bag the bloke out once again!

So pretty much how it is apart from Seb and acres who I reckon is only a wingman anyway. Not really semantics. It’s seeing how bad you think the midfield is under richo. Seems like he has most right.

Surely dunstan only plays at the coal face when he plays.

 

[t_94]

So pretty much how it is apart from Seb and acres who I reckon is only a wingman anyway. Not really semantics. It’s seeing how bad you think the midfield is under richo. Seems like he has most right.

Surely dunstan only plays at the coal face when he plays.

Agree Acres is a wingman. Billings on one wing Acres on the other would be ideal. Newnes can rotate through when one is resting.

For some reason they seem to want to fit Phillips in there when he is inferior to other options and stick Acres in a forward pocket and ruck.

 

[plugger66]

Agree Acres is a wingman. Billings on one wing Acres on the other would be ideal. Newnes can rotate through when one is resting.

For some reason they seem to want to fit Phillips in there when he is inferior to other options and stick Acres in a forward pocket and ruck.

I thinks that’s happening because we lost lonie. And let’s face it they tried young and that failed. Acres can at least kick and mark.

 

[mightymalaka]

It's not necessarily the names Plugger but how they are used!
How many times have you seen the opposition get a run on against us and yet the same 4 are starting in the middle throughout it all!
The same goes for other parts of the ground for that matter, we have barely been able to kick a score all season, yet what has the coach done to rectify this?

To quote Derek and Clive......F*CK ALL!
Ooohhh there's those capitals again! It's on now baby!

 

[plugger66]

It's not necessarily the names Plugger but how they are used!
How many times have you seen the opposition get a run on against us and yet the same 4 are starting in the middle throughout it all!
The same goes for other parts of the ground for that matter, we have barely been able to kick a score all season, yet what has the coach done to rectify this?

To quote Derek and Clive......F*CK ALL!
Ooohhh there's those capitals again! It's on now baby!

I think you are overrating what coaches do. If the problem for the run on is the midfield then it’s the midfield coach to fix. Same with the forward line. That’s rats baby. Richo does the all round coaching but not certain areas. That’s why they break up into areas at breaks these days. They spend more time with their area coach than the main man. Even local clubs do that now. Get out and hear local coaches. The main coach speaks for about 2 minutes. The line coach speaks for about 5.

 

[OxSaint]

Papley and Dunkley should be trade targets (hope that one agree’s) and have a massive tilt at cogs.

 

[gringo2011]

Papley and Dunkley should be trade targets (hope that one agree’s) and have a massive tilt at cogs.

I remember Papley being linked a while back.

 

[gringo2011]

Also thank god we didn't get Menzel.

 

[The_Steadier]

thinking around 10

It entirely depends on where billings wants to go (if he wants to go).

Zero chance of anything close to pick 10 (or equivalent value) given he's uncontracted if he chose the bummers and dodo for instance.
(Although I dare say they probably couldn't afford him these days, so maybe no issue there?)


The Tom Mitchell trade a few years ago is an ok precedent I think for billings current value.
Pick 14 for him- in a deal that was done very quickly (on like day 1 of trade week?)

At the time it was instantly widely regarded as very much a deal in the hawks favour- the swans could well have played much harder ball if they wanted... and successfully squeezed more than pick 14 out of the hawks for him.
But it seemed that for the sake of getting a deal done and dusted early with no hassle- the swans took slight unders for Mitchell.

I'd say we would (like sydney with mitchell) not take a super hardball line with any club that wasn't trying to do a dodo and offering up a "4th rounder or GTFO, we'll go Rookie draft".

So yeah- mid/late first rounder for billings I'd say is the best we'd get.

 

[The_Steadier]

I would think we'd want back at least what we paid for him, he's developed to a point that he's ready to go into his prime. If we let him go for less we'd look like morons.

He's uncontracted- we'd have no leg to stand on demanding anything close to pick 3 for billings if he requested a trade.

Mid/late first (or equivalent) is best case I'd say.

Given where our list is at- I'd say we'd be pushing for a quality player rather than a draftpick from whichever club he chose anyway.

 

[Aussieviking1]

So where is goldy playing. I don’t get this back up thing. He isn’t coming to us to back up. How can the saints sell that. If we stupidly got him he is our ruck. Simple

I find it amusing Plugger that all arguments of yours are closed arguments, simple.
If Goldy comes as ruck, all good.
There are options for Marshall.
He could play off the bench, would having two rucks not work?
Imagine Marshall being rested and then unleashed throughout the game in intervals.
Gold would teach him plenty.
It could be a blessing, it might not work, there may have to be positional changes.
It has to be looked at at least. Simple.

 

[plugger66]

I find it amusing Plugger that all arguments of yours are closed arguments, simple.
If Goldy comes as ruck, all good.
There are options for Marshall.
He could play off the bench, would having two rucks not work?
Imagine Marshall being rested and then unleashed throughout the game in intervals.
Gold would teach him plenty.
It could be a blessing, it might not work, there may have to be positional changes.
It has to be looked at at least. Simple.

I don't think all my arguments are closed. Only the obvious ones. Firstly we know you cant have rucks coming off and on the bench and if Marshall is going well why would we want him to play only 50% anyway. Also goldy may not be a teacher. Its not like Pruess is killing it at the dees who have decided that playing 2 rucks hasnt worked. And of course you look at everything but you you reject the bad moves. IMO this is clearly a bad move that has no positives. Cant actually tink of one. I beleive only Port and sometimes WCE play 2 genuine first rucks. We need another ruck but he should be back up. Or just keep Longer.

 

[bird_man]

It entirely depends on where billings wants to go (if he wants to go).

Zero chance of anything close to pick 10 (or equivalent value) given he's uncontracted if he chose the bummers and dodo for instance.
(Although I dare say they probably couldn't afford him these days, so maybe no issue there?)


The Tom Mitchell trade a few years ago is an ok precedent I think for billings current value.
Pick 14 for him- in a deal that was done very quickly (on like day 1 of trade week?)

At the time it was instantly widely regarded as very much a deal in the hawks favour- the swans could well have played much harder ball if they wanted... and successfully squeezed more than pick 14 out of the hawks for him.
But it seemed that for the sake of getting a deal done and dusted early with no hassle- the swans took slight unders for Mitchell.

I'd say we would (like sydney with mitchell) not take a super hardball line with any club that wasn't trying to do a dodo and offering up a "4th rounder or GTFO, we'll go Rookie draft".

So yeah- mid/late first rounder for billings I'd say is the best we'd get.

People often bring up the Tom Mitchell trade when comparing arguments. What about the Prestia trade?

We'd be silly to just take whatever was offered and not playing hard ball. Dodoro isn't the only one to do it.

 

[triggering bro]

I think Billings will stay because he will get paid significantly more with us than any other club. Rumours that we will pay him 800-900k if we meet his demand. I can’t see any other club paying that sort of money for him.

 

[BrutThough]

I think Billings will stay because he will get paid significantly more with us than any other club. Rumours that we will pay him 800-900k if we meet his demand. I can’t see any other club paying that sort of money for him.

It will end up being around 800k.
The reports of 900k just seems like Connors playing games in the media.

 

[plugger66]

I think Billings will stay because he will get paid significantly more with us than any other club. Rumours that we will pay him 800-900k if we meet his demand. I can’t see any other club paying that sort of money for him.

I really hope we don't pay him that much. I know we need to spend the money but im not sure that's the price we should be paying him. Its way overs. More than Danger if you believe what you read.

 

[tomjoad]

I think everything stems from the poor list. To cover the holes in quality we work harder than other sides, it means players who can't run out games are punished where at another club they can carry a slow plodding inside mid. We expect every player in the side to be able to run back to help defend in the back half then run and spread to create over lap or marking options.

It's the catch 22, I think Playfair's transition game last year fell apart because we trusted players to stay in position and win their own contests. It was a **** up and by the end of the year we were back to Richo's swarm because the fans wanted blood.

A new coach might actually go backwards to go forwards with the expectation that some players will need to earn their keep by winning one on ones. Guys like Acres might get more love with his one way line breaking but less interest in two way running. It might actually change the way we draft as well.

"I think everything stems from our poor list."
Enough said.

 

[triggering bro]

It will end up being around 800k.
The reports of 900k just seems like Connors playing games in the media.

I’m not as certain as you. The club have plenty of cap space & no stars to pay so Connors & Billings have a fantastic hand to play to extract maximum dollars out of the club.

 

[gringo2011]

He's uncontracted- we'd have no leg to stand on demanding anything close to pick 3 for billings if he requested a trade.

Mid/late first (or equivalent) is best case I'd say.

Given where our list is at- I'd say we'd be pushing for a quality player rather than a draftpick from whichever club he chose anyway.

He still doesn't choose where to go. When has there been a player that wasn't a free agent leave for way below value at the end of their contract? All it does is give them a chance to ask to move. If Essendon can't get 2 firsts we have the right to trade him to who ever we want still. Shiel cost 2 firsts and he's not a superstar either. I would think the going rate for a high end player is still 2 firsts or even at a stretch a first and early second.

Most clubs don't give up high end talent to get a trade for a player...it literally defeats the purpose unless they have multiples of a type. I'd rather take picks to the draft than get Guelfi or some other lemon, which I imagine is the type you'd get thrown in.

 

[triggering bro]

I really hope we don't pay him that much. I know we need to spend the money but im not sure that's the price we should be paying him. Its way overs. More than Danger if you believe what you read.

Paying him that much doesn’t sit too well with me but the more I think about it the less frustrated I get.

One way of looking at it is most clubs would have a pay scale eg the top player gets x amount & the top 5 get y amount. Where would Billings fit in that scale at our club? Easily top 5, possibly our best. So even know he wouldn’t be top 5 at the Pies he gets top 5 dollars due to the salary cap being consistent across all clubs.

I think AFL wide Billings is a 600k player but if he re-signs with us he probably gets 800k due to where he sits on our list.

 

[plugger66]

He still doesn't choose where to go. When has there been a player that wasn't a free agent leave for way below value at the end of their contract? All it does is give them a chance to ask to move. If Essendon can't get 2 firsts we have the right to trade him to who ever we want still. Shiel cost 2 firsts and he's not a superstar either. I would think the going rate for a high end player is still 2 firsts or even at a stretch a first and early second.

Most clubs don't give up high end talent to get a trade for a player...it literally defeats the purpose unless they have multiples of a type. I'd rather take picks to the draft than get Guelfi or some other lemon, which I imagine is the type you'd get thrown in.

Unfortunately billings isn’t Shiel. Certainly not yet.

 

[plugger66]

Paying him that much doesn’t sit too well with me but the more I think about it the less frustrated I get.

One way of looking at it is most clubs would have a pay scale eg the top player gets x amount & the top 5 get y amount. Where would Billings fit in that scale at our club? Easily top 5, possibly our best. So even know he wouldn’t be top 5 at the Pies he gets top 5 dollars due to the salary cap being consistent across all clubs.

I think AFL wide Billings is a 600k player but if he re-signs with us he probably gets 800k due to where he sits on our list.

Yes probably correct. The one who timed his contract well is Marshall. What does he get if he continues this form for another 11 games. He will go from minimum to huge.