List Mgmt. 2021 Trade & List Management Thread II - IN: CCJ

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lets break this down:

He's kicked 11 goals in 9 games, including 4 in one game, so his actual figure of 1.4 goals a game is inflated. Hardly a sample size that you can take to the bank.

His ruck work is horrible. I would wager that Edwards ruckwork is probably better at the moment.

If he comes in for whatever price, are we honestly looking at playing him alongside Larkey AND Comben? Seems too tall considering none of those three will be our back up ruck.

He has no runs on the board at all.
On the same logic, take Xerri's 2 goals out of a game against Brisbane, and he's kicked 3 goals from 11 games. If X had kicked 4 in a match, we'd be over the moon. And as for the second comment, Tigers must be thinking he's made a score or two, or they wouldn't have offered 2 years.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

On the same logic, take Xerri's 2 goals out of a game against Brisbane, and he's kicked 3 goals from 11 games. If X had kicked 4 in a match, we'd be over the moon. And as for the second comment, Tigers must be thinking he's made a score or two, or they wouldn't have offered 2 years.
But we don’t need to give anything up for xerri
 
umm, I know; the problem is that Tristan looks like the pick 70 odd we took him with. Apart from the willing contest, I just don't see the upside
I think play him in his natural position would be a start. His work in the vfl showed promise and earned him a spot. I don’t see CCJ as such a massive upgrade. Happy to bring him in but I’d sooner hit the draft if the price is above pick 38
 
Expecting a multitude of dislikes but here goes.

In: CCJ, 7, 15, 26, 28 + Future 1st (RIC)
Out: 1, 38, 39 (Dumont compo)

This would position us with 5 picks in the top 30.

7, 15, 20, 26, 28

With 7 (9) we take Gibcus if hes on the board.

If not we look to live trade our pick perhaps to WCE who may wish to jump a pick ahead of Freo who hold pick 8 to grab local Erasmus. WCE hold pick 10 and may be willing to swap it along with their future 1st for 7 and our future 2nd giving us 3 x 1st rounders next year.

I would take a similar approach to our other selections picking when there is a player we like around that mark but entertaining trading options if not.

Having a more flexible pick structure allows us to pick for needs a little more whilst not sacrificing "best available" at our pick.
 
Expecting a multitude of dislikes but here goes.

In: CCJ, 7, 15, 26, 28 + Future 1st (RIC)
Out: 1, 38, 39 (Dumont compo)

This would position us with 5 picks in the top 30.

7, 15, 20, 26, 28

With 7 (9) we take Gibcus if hes on the board.

If not we look to live trade our pick perhaps to WCE who may wish to jump a pick ahead of Freo who hold pick 8 to grab local Erasmus. WCE hold pick 10 and may be willing to swap it along with their future 1st for 7 and our future 2nd giving us 3 x 1st rounders next year.

I would take a similar approach to our other selections picking when there is a player we like around that mark but entertaining trading options if not.

Having a more flexible pick structure allows us to pick for needs a little more whilst not sacrificing "best available" at our pick.
Remember we don’t have to solve all our problems in one trade period. I still think we go for the premium player pick 1 give us the best opportunity to do that when we are at the pointy end we need the premium player not the very good player
 
Expecting a multitude of dislikes but here goes.

In: CCJ, 7, 15, 26, 28 + Future 1st (RIC)
Out: 1, 38, 39 (Dumont compo)

This would position us with 5 picks in the top 30.

7, 15, 20, 26, 28

With 7 (9) we take Gibcus if hes on the board.

If not we look to live trade our pick perhaps to WCE who may wish to jump a pick ahead of Freo who hold pick 8 to grab local Erasmus. WCE hold pick 10 and may be willing to swap it along with their future 1st for 7 and our future 2nd giving us 3 x 1st rounders next year.

I would take a similar approach to our other selections picking when there is a player we like around that mark but entertaining trading options if not.

Having a more flexible pick structure allows us to pick for needs a little more whilst not sacrificing "best available" at our pick.

41ld4dhs1v571.gif
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

CCJ for 38 and Dom Tyson, will Walker and Brad scotts game plan
 
Expecting a multitude of dislikes but here goes.

In: CCJ, 7, 15, 26, 28 + Future 1st (RIC)
Out: 1, 38, 39 (Dumont compo)

This would position us with 5 picks in the top 30.

7, 15, 20, 26, 28

With 7 (9) we take Gibcus if hes on the board.

If not we look to live trade our pick perhaps to WCE who may wish to jump a pick ahead of Freo who hold pick 8 to grab local Erasmus. WCE hold pick 10 and may be willing to swap it along with their future 1st for 7 and our future 2nd giving us 3 x 1st rounders next year.

I would take a similar approach to our other selections picking when there is a player we like around that mark but entertaining trading options if not.

Having a more flexible pick structure allows us to pick for needs a little more whilst not sacrificing "best available" at our pick.
TennisPlayerAndy

You know what to do!
 
Our negotiation for CCJ should be something like this:

NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: That's totally inadequate. We want pick 20 and upgrade our 2022 4th pick to your 3rd.
NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: OK, we'll drop the exchange of next year's picks. Just add an upgrade of our pick 40 to your 38 on top of 20.
NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: Alright, no other exchange of picks - just the pick 20 will do.
NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: It's not enough.
NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: No, no, no. Pick 20 must be involved.
NM: We'll give you pick 38.
Richmond: Look, at this rate, we're walking away.
NM: We'll give you pick 38 or walk CCJ to the PSD.
Richmond: OK, deal.
 
I haven’t kept up with this thread because, well, it’s hard to, so apologies if it’s been discussed.

It hurts me to write this because he’s one of my favourites but with the way our midfield is shaping. Ughhhh. I don’t even want to write it, BUT, should North entertain trading Jed?

Ok I’ve finished vomiting in my mouth just thinking and writing about it.
My logic is that Jed is a pure mid (and plays like a genuine Shinboner which is why I hate this)

But with our 23 and under midfield looking like a rolled gold midfield of the future I just don’t see him getting much time in the midfield with Powell coming back and most likely JHF coming in. It might be the best option for him and the club and he’s got value. We even saw him playing different roles this year without our full midfield playing. It won’t get easier.

Sometimes you’ve got to do the hard things.
 
Negotiating with the team that has the number 1 pick in the PSD has some impact on the trade value of an out-of-contract player. North and CCJ have a legitimate option to make it happen without Richmond getting anything if Richmond refuses to be reasonable on a trade or tries to push him somewhere he doesn't want to go. If it's the choice between pick 38 and nothing, pick 38 looks great.
All of a sudden we get a PP with the caveat attached it "must be traded" (ie to Richmond)
 
I haven’t kept up with this thread because, well, it’s hard to, so apologies if it’s been discussed.

It hurts me to write this because he’s one of my favourites but with the way our midfield is shaping. Ughhhh. I don’t even want to write it, BUT, should North entertain trading Jed?

Ok I’ve finished vomiting in my mouth just thinking and writing about it.
My logic is that Jed is a pure mid (and plays like a genuine Shinboner which is why I hate this)

But with our 23 and under midfield looking like a rolled gold midfield of the future I just don’t see him getting much time in the midfield with Powell coming back and most likely JHF coming in. It might be the best option for him and the club and he’s got value. We even saw him playing different roles this year without our full midfield playing. It won’t get easier.

Sometimes you’ve got to do the hard things.

Wouldn't get enough for him to make it worthwhile
 
Expecting a multitude of dislikes but here goes.

In: CCJ, 7, 15, 26, 28 + Future 1st (RIC)
Out: 1, 38, 39 (Dumont compo)

This would position us with 5 picks in the top 30.

7, 15, 20, 26, 28

With 7 (9) we take Gibcus if hes on the board.

If not we look to live trade our pick perhaps to WCE who may wish to jump a pick ahead of Freo who hold pick 8 to grab local Erasmus. WCE hold pick 10 and may be willing to swap it along with their future 1st for 7 and our future 2nd giving us 3 x 1st rounders next year.

I would take a similar approach to our other selections picking when there is a player we like around that mark but entertaining trading options if not.

Having a more flexible pick structure allows us to pick for needs a little more whilst not sacrificing "best available" at our pick.

This is really missing a 4 or 5 way trade to sweeten the deal.

Maybe the club is thinking if he is in the PSD, he would be worth more to us (in terms of a contract value) than if we would require to do a trade with another club. Like if Richmond offers him $450k a year and we say we would give him $600k (and actually play him if his form warranted it)... but could go as high as $750k in the PSD.

It is a bit of a dick move, but I would be disappointed if the club didn't attempt to use the PSD to get a decent prospect like Crows did with Hately last year. I'd prefer we stiff a club that gets gifted a ton of academy talent they don't have to pay for... ie GC.
 
CCJ’s forward craft and athleticism is miles better than anything Xerri and Campbell offer. Would be a good option. Plus LDU to JHF to CCJ has a ring to it.


A few nice highlights and potentially something to work with. But if his bag of 4 came in that Adelaide game, it looked like he had the noted 20 year old, 193cm key defender, Nicholas Murray playing on him. Put a few kicks to X's advantage in space he'd probably clunk a few there too. (BTW, not saying X is better that CCJ, just that CCJ hasn't showed heaps yet.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top