List Mgmt. 2021 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

Hi everyone, for those interested some great links plus the Big Footy Draft, Trade & Free Agency twitter as per below:

 

[Membling]

Not different at all.
You can't b*tch and moan about how unfair Adelaide are treating us but then suggest that we should stich Port.

Completely disagree.

Do not think I have ever bitched or moaned about situation. Is what it is.

Secondly Port have the ability to retain Ladhams, we do not.

Would also argue that Dawson is far more valuable than Ladhams based on exposed form.

 

[swansfan51]

What do you think of the Dawson standoff? should we take Melbourne F1?

That seems to be the best offer available

 

[Maximumlnsanity]

I can see why we gave Hayward 4yrs now.

He always deserved 4 years, it just took him forever to remind us why. If only Carlton didn't break his jaw in 2019

 

[Kiama Chris]

Considering it has been said that we are happy to pay his full 2022 contract which is probably $100K greater than his 3 year average, the pick we give has to be less than what it would otherwise be. I know that they have already knocked back our offer of 31 but under the circumstances I really do believe that that is fair and we should dig in on that.

31 + 39 = 16 is too much.
31 + 64 = 27 is more reasonable
39 + 64 = 34 not bad at all.
12 should not come into play.

 

[swanton]

Maybe we can go to bulldogs
With 31 and 39 for thier pick 23 (gives them extra 235 points)

Then 23 for Ladhams

 

[robbieando]

We were extremely light touch on delistings though, could easily clear more space if we wanted

Sinclair’s a re-signing should’ve waited until after the trade period but really most of the players that you would be looking to move on (Taylor and Naismith) have contacts for next year and next to no interest from elsewhere.

I suspect Ronke, Clarke and Reid will be delisted next week unless they are traded to a new home. At worse one might grab a rookie list spot for next year as Insurance.

 

[Maximumlnsanity]

Sinclair’s a re-signing should’ve waited until after the trade period but really most of the players that you would be looking to move on (Taylor and Naismith) have contacts for next year and next to no interest from elsewhere.

I suspect Ronke, Clarke and Reid will be delisted next week unless they are traded to a new home. At worse one might grab a rookie list spot for next year as Insurance.

We have no AFL ready #1 ruck depth outside of Hickey right now, and hopefully Ladhams within 48 hours. If both of them go down and Cal isn't around our ruck options are either the greenest ruck in the league McAndrew, or full time McLean or Amartey. Giving one more year to Cal was a fine decision, especially since he won't play unless there's an emergency

 

[robbieando]

Maybe we can go to bulldogs
With 31 and 39 for thier pick 23 (gives them extra 235 points)

Then 23 for Ladhams

Understand it from the Ladhams trade stand point but would leave us with only picks 12, 70 and 88 going into the draft thus would need to flip whatever future pick we get from Adelaide to move back to an early pick this year.

 

[robbieando]

We have no AFL ready #1 ruck depth outside of Hickey right now, and hopefully Ladhams within 48 hours. If both of them go down and Cal isn't around our ruck options are either the greenest ruck in the league McAndrew, or full time McLean or Amartey. Giving one more year to Cal was a fine decision, especially since he won't play unless there's an emergency

I understand the decision in isolation. If we wanted to be more savage with our delistings which I was responding to then his signature could’ve waited that’s all.

 

[caesar88]

I am apprehensive about what we will have to give for Ladhams, but I think he'll prove a worthy addition to the list, both next year and beyond. Giving up a top 20 pick for him would be overs IMO and a big con. But weighed up against the pros:

- At the very worst, he'd provide AFL-standard ruck depth, meaning we can keep all the other talls relevant to our structures in their place without having to shift anyone around, a la the Aliir debacle that ultimately cost him his security at our club.

- More young competition to push the likes of Logan, McLean and Amartey. Even though I don't think they are quite going for the same position as Ladhams, who'd mainly be second rucking, having another guy who can play tall forward would be plenty pressure on them. All >24 and great for their development.

- Possible we could replicate Melbourne's success with two rucks + two key forwards. Wouldn't know until we try it but if that becomes the template of the next half a dozen years, as trends often come and go, it'd be a luxury that we would have the stocks to capitalise on that.

- And the obvious, which is that Hickey won't be around forever, and neither will Buddy. He joins those three forwards I mentioned as a quartet of solid young talls we could have for the next decade, and at best, Ladhams proves his ruck merits and becomes the main ruck of the bunch.

Get it done Swans.

 

[anotherletdown]

I am apprehensive about what we will have to give for Ladhams, but I think he'll prove a worthy addition to the list, both next year and beyond. Giving up a top 20 pick for him would be overs IMO and a big con. But weighed up against the pros:

- At the very worst, he'd provide AFL-standard ruck depth, meaning we can keep all the other talls relevant to our structures in their place without having to shift anyone around, a la the Aliir debacle that ultimately cost him his security at our club.

- More young competition to push the likes of Logan, McLean and Amartey. Even though I don't think they are quite going for the same position as Ladhams, who'd mainly be second rucking, having another guy who can play tall forward would be plenty pressure on them. All >24 and great for their development.

- Possible we could replicate Melbourne's success with two rucks + two key forwards. Wouldn't know until we try it but if that becomes the template of the next half a dozen years, as trends often come and go, it'd be a luxury that we would have the stocks to capitalise on that.

- And the obvious, which is that Hickey won't be around forever, and neither will Buddy. He joins those three forwards I mentioned as a quartet of solid young talls we could have for the next decade, and at best, Ladhams proves his ruck merits and becomes the main ruck of the bunch.

Get it done Swans.

Should have gone for Lynch... hate the thought we'll lose Hewett and Dawson (Ladhams or not) and not end up with a first rounder to show for it.

 

[anotherletdown]

Don't want to give up a first for Ladhams... if 31 isn't enough, apparently.... would anyone do 12 and 39 for Ladhams and 16? Points equivalent to 31 but worth of 16 to 12 has to mean something?

 

[ShireSwan]

I trust that you're quite happy with the way Adelaide are looking at trading Dawson in????

False equivalence. We don't want him out. Aren't shopping him due to salary cap pressure. Other clubs want him.

But in anycase you drive the bargain you can get. That's' how things work.

 

[BloodySwan]

Understand it from the Ladhams trade stand point but would leave us with only picks 12, 70 and 88 going into the draft thus would need to flip whatever future pick we get from Adelaide to move back to an early pick this year.

If we don't get ladhams we're likely to use one of our picks in the 30s for a ruck either way.

 

[S120]

- And the obvious, which is that Hickey won't be around forever, and neither will Buddy. He joins those three forwards I mentioned as a quartet of solid young talls we could have for the next decade, and at best, Ladhams proves his ruck merits and becomes the main ruck of the bunch.

Ladhams clearly has talent and I think it comes down to his desire to be the best player he can be and how much grunt he has. The rumours of his reputation are that he needs to pull his finger out a little and stop partying so much to be as good as he can be. We recruited Mumford around the same age and he hadn't yet worked out how to be a professional just yet but got it together over his time at the Swans. Personally, I think most rucks can be viable first rucks if they have the grunt and are fit/strong enough. If we can drill him into being as fit and strong as he's ever been, I reckon he'll be ready to take over first ruck long-term for us.

 

[lollol]

It's such a weird system. At the end of the day a player out of contract should be able to choose where he goes. It just sucks that under the system in place, the compensation received by the team he leaves is directly related to his destination's ladder position.

Clubs should also be able to sell player contracts and send them wherever they want too.

 

[FreeAgent1]

What do we think the best trade we can squeeze out of Crows? Future second added to MF1st?

 

[RUNVS]

What do we think the best trade we can squeeze out of Crows? Future second added to MF1st?

Yes that is what I am thinking at the moment unfortunately.

Melbournes 2022 1st rounder
Adelaides 2022 2nd rounder.

it is a pitiful amount given what Dawson is actually worth though.

 

[scaryness]

I just want this done. I want Dawson to stay, and I implore the Swans to try to the end to keep him, but if it ain't happening I'll take Melbourne's 1st and get it over with.

Ideally I think Adelaide's future first is the most fair but trade week isn't fair in these situations, and we have no leverage.

 

[Millky95]

I just want this done. I want Dawson to stay, and I implore the Swans to try to the end to keep him, but if it ain't happening I'll take Melbourne's 1st and get it over with.

Ideally I think Adelaide's future first is the most fair but trade week isn't fair in these situations, and we have no leverage.

He is an uncontracted free agent, what more do you expect?

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

I understand the decision in isolation. If we wanted to be more savage with our delistings which I was responding to then his signature could’ve waited that’s all.

The timing of the Sinclair signing is a strange one. My hope is either that he had another offer somewhere else so we needed to snaffle him early given our lack of back up rucks (unlikely) or he is on minimum salary and a great support to developing players in the 2s (and we don’t mind culling others to keep him on in a developmental capacity - noting it would be hard to develop as a midfielder in the 2s if you only have fill in rucks who cannot provide the same structures that you will need to play to in the 1s, so it’s not just the developing rucks Sinclair would be supporting).

If we just signed him too early and made a mistake, well that is a poor mistake to make… not good enough.

 

[KingV23]

The timing of the Sinclair signing is a strange one. My hope is either that he had another offer somewhere else so we needed to snaffle him early given our lack of back up rucks (unlikely) or he is on minimum salary and a great support to developing players in the 2s (and we don’t mind culling others to keep him on in a developmental capacity - noting it would be hard to develop as a midfielder in the 2s if you only have fill in rucks who cannot provide the same structures that you will need to play to in the 1s, so it’s not just the developing rucks Sinclair would be supporting).

If we just signed him too early and made a mistake, well that is a poor mistake to make… not good enough.

Considering they re-signed Sam Naismith before he even made a return match, I would assume in regards to Sinclair, I would not be surprised if they made a poor mistake.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

 

[cherub]

He is an uncontracted free agent, what more do you expect?

I thought the point the Swans were making was that he wasn't a free agent, although he is contracted.

 

[Millky95]

I thought the point the Swans were making was that he wasn't a free agent, although he is contracted.

No, Dawson is uncontracted. Which was the point of my joke

 

[BloodySwan]

23 and future second for Dawson. Offer one of them for Ladhams. Slight unders for both players but in the end everyone gets their man. Effectively trading Dawson for Ladhams and an early second round