List Mgmt. 2023 Trade & List Management Thread II - Goldy&Bucket➡️✅/'24 EoFR & #44➡️Stephens&#25✅/#21&#25➡️Fisher&#17✅/'24 EoFR➡️#18✅

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello Shinboners!

The embedded resources below are kept up to date by the trade board mods (as much as possible – we are human after all). Enjoy!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've always assumed the only way we could get our dirty mitts on GC's first rounder was by trading out our future first. But now I'm wondering whether they'd consider our priority picks (if we finish 17th again, it would be picks 21 and 38 I think) plus our natural future second rounder (20) for pick 4 and a token fringe player.

Miraculously the points from those three picks equal pick 4. It would be pretty handy if we could use the draft assistance to get Caleb Graham and Nick Watson, for example.

They clearly would not. Gold Coast aren't going to do a trade where it only breaks even if we finish 17th or lower, and where the picks are in the wrong year for matching bids for their academy players. Let alone throwing in a player for free. All this talk of us trading our future first for their pick makes no sense. They don't want future picks, they want points this year.

They also have the whip hand in the negotiations, they have a pick that will give access to a tier 1 player in the draft.

I get that people here want what's best for North, but the amount of wasted posts on prospective trades that make no sense for the other party can get tiresome after a while.
 

Psicosis

Brownlow Medallist
May 7, 2012
13,132
58,381
Bird Rock
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Two big areas of improvement in transition game for us next year will lie at the respective flanks - Forward & Back.

Back Flanks - It's an opportunity that is now well overdue. For as long as I can remember we haven't been an elite slingshot team. Ball use & speed. We have a couple pieces in Sheezel, Goater & Bergman. Need to continue to add to this group. The GC game was as good a defensive rebound performance I have seen from our club in a long time. Fisher will add to this, potentially Reid.

Forward Flanks - Looking at Carltons/GWS' improvement, a big part has been their forward flank role players ability to work up and back. Getting involved in forward transition chains, whilst applying manic pressure. Who are our Bedford/Daniels? My concern in this area is that whilst we have offensive weapons in this position, they lack the aerobic capacity to give us what we need. Big preseasons from George, Stephenson, Curtis, potentially Watson. It needs to be a big focus.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

perplexed

Premiership Player
Nov 25, 2015
4,227
6,375
AFL Club
North Melbourne
They clearly would not. Gold Coast aren't going to do a trade where it only breaks even if we finish 17th or lower, and where the picks are in the wrong year for matching bids for their academy players. Let alone throwing in a player for free. All this talk of us trading our future first for their pick makes no sense. They don't want future picks, they want points this year.

They also have the whip hand in the negotiations, they have a pick that will give access to a tier 1 player in the draft.

I get that people here want what's best for North, but the amount of wasted posts on prospective trades that make no sense for the other party can get tiresome after a while.
This isn't true.

Gold Coast will want to match the same way Brisbane did last year, with a pile of third and fourth rounders that they live trade in at the start of the draft. With three players to match, the advantages of doing it this way are even greater as the more picks you use to match the early bids the more your later picks increase in value for matching the later bids. Free list positions are key to this, as whoever they trade with will need to bring the junk picks to the draft.

Basically, they won't have trouble matching, and they will want to leave themselves with the best possible draft hand for next year. That means targeting the best F1's. A live trade such as our F1 + 3/4 junk picks for 4 + F2 would be one of their best options. Though we would have to create enough list vacancies to bring those junk picks in.
 

chubbspeterson

Premiership Player
Oct 10, 2007
4,314
4,971
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
GC would definitely want an F1 and points this year as the trade package.
Demons could offer their F1, 1st and 2nd this year for points just as an example. Dogs as well with 17 and F1 perhaps.
 

Disco Dew

Premiership Player
Mar 21, 2022
4,051
18,305
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Brown gone? It’s finally happened?

The Office Party Hard GIF
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This isn't true.

Gold Coast will want to match the same way Brisbane did last year, with a pile of third and fourth rounders that they live trade in at the start of the draft. With three players to match, the advantages of doing it this way are even greater as the more picks you use to match the early bids the more your later picks increase in value for matching the later bids. Free list positions are key to this, as whoever they trade with will need to bring the junk picks to the draft.

Basically, they won't have trouble matching, and they will want to leave themselves with the best possible draft hand for next year. That means targeting the best F1's. A live trade such as our F1 + 3/4 junk picks for 4 + F2 would be one of their best options. Though we would have to create enough list vacancies to bring those junk picks in.
This is not the same scenario that I responded to. I agree that bulk trading in of low picks is their best way of matching. However, creating that many list spots isn't easy, especially when we have other strong draft picks, and we have a reducing list size. We'd need 6-7 list spots going into the draft, taking into account that we'd want to pick with 2, 3 and PA's 1st, which would give 3-4 junk picks for trading to GC. That would mean 8-9 main list changes if we bring in 2 players via trade/FA (E.g. Fisher, Stephens). We'd also need to fill those list spots after the draft via DFA or PSS players (or lower draft picks), so there's also the opportunity cost of that compared to actually using those 'junk picks'. So, we're not an ideal candidate for that sort of trade with GC.

The original trade suggestion was the one I had more of an issue with. There's not a world where Gold Coast accept 2 x 2nds and 1 x 3rd for pick 4.
 

PokerRoo

Team Captain
May 25, 2005
309
598
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
GC are not going to move on pick 4 for the same points. Why would they? they may as well just have it taken up by the bid, and not give another team pick 4.....unless that team is Geelong, then they def would do it
 
Jun 8, 2004
13,597
29,956
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Can't wait to see who replaces Brown.

Didn't they try and talk Boomer into taking on a full time development role but he knocked it back?

Someone like Luke Power would be a good target.

Premiership player, AFL academy experience, AFL assistant coach, AFL development coach, been involved at multiple clubs who have developed a lot of kids.
 
Last edited:

JGreezy

Premiership Player
Mar 27, 2014
3,275
11,769
AFL Club
North Melbourne
GC are not going to move on pick 4 for the same points. Why would they? they may as well just have it taken up by the bid, and not give another team pick 4.....unless that team is Geelong, then they def would do it
They might like equal points + pick 19 in 2024.

Although, they might get an F1 offer, where they get less points that they like more.
 

perplexed

Premiership Player
Nov 25, 2015
4,227
6,375
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This is not the same scenario that I responded to. I agree that bulk trading in of low picks is their best way of matching. However, creating that many list spots isn't easy, especially when we have other strong draft picks, and we have a reducing list size. We'd need 6-7 list spots going into the draft, taking into account that we'd want to pick with 2, 3 and PA's 1st, which would give 3-4 junk picks for trading to GC. That would mean 8-9 main list changes if we bring in 2 players via trade/FA (E.g. Fisher, Stephens). We'd also need to fill those list spots after the draft via DFA or PSS players (or lower draft picks), so there's also the opportunity cost of that compared to actually using those 'junk picks'. So, we're not an ideal candidate for that sort of trade with GC.

The original trade suggestion was the one I had more of an issue with. There's not a world where Gold Coast accept 2 x 2nds and 1 x 3rd for pick 4.
I'm not sure we are going to have any trouble finding blokes to delist or push back to the rookie list - especially if we are allowed extra places like this year. Not counting rookies, I got to twelve. And that doesn't include worthless players that we need to keep just because they are tall.
 

gustaaf

Senior List
Oct 12, 2018
270
1,068
Newcastle NSW
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Man Utd, Vitesse Arnhem, Raiders
Quite a few members in Part 1 of this thread seem to think that we'll likely get a similar assistance package to the rubbish one we got last year from the AFL. That package did very little for us, but probably appeased the other clubs who didn't want us to get much at all and certainly not a priority pick. Surely the AFL isn't going to leave us hanging again after effectively finishing last or equal last for four years straight if you forget about percentages for a minute. When was the last time that happened to a club? We've won 10 of our last 81 games ffs! I assume North has been lobbying the AFL hard for a meaningful assistance package by asking for the maximum possible in the hope of getting something reasonable that will actually help us. Compensation for McKay should not influence that, which the club needs to emphasise with the AFL. We are one of a minority of clubs that has never received a priority pick.
 

CharlieMortdecai

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
5,737
6,521
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Someone like Luke Power would be a good target.

Premiership player, AFL academy experience, Afl assistant coach, AFl development coach, been involved at multiple clubs who have developed a lot of kids.
Send Brady out with the shopping list, what's the bet he comes back with Sam Powers again.
 

hilly

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 27, 2000
15,588
31,200
Frank Grey Smith Bar
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Triple M commentary team
This is not the same scenario that I responded to. I agree that bulk trading in of low picks is their best way of matching. However, creating that many list spots isn't easy, especially when we have other strong draft picks, and we have a reducing list size. We'd need 6-7 list spots going into the draft, taking into account that we'd want to pick with 2, 3 and PA's 1st, which would give 3-4 junk picks for trading to GC. That would mean 8-9 main list changes if we bring in 2 players via trade/FA (E.g. Fisher, Stephens). We'd also need to fill those list spots after the draft via DFA or PSS players (or lower draft picks), so there's also the opportunity cost of that compared to actually using those 'junk picks'. So, we're not an ideal candidate for that sort of trade with GC.

The original trade suggestion was the one I had more of an issue with. There's not a world where Gold Coast accept 2 x 2nds and 1 x 3rd for pick 4.

I think that the rule around list vacancies being equal to picks only applies to when the draft commences. As such, we could theoretically trade 16 for 27, 28, 29, 42, 43, 46 and 69 as soon as the draft commences.
 

Moti

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 4, 2001
13,764
10,553
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This is not the same scenario that I responded to. I agree that bulk trading in of low picks is their best way of matching. However, creating that many list spots isn't easy, especially when we have other strong draft picks, and we have a reducing list size. We'd need 6-7 list spots going into the draft, taking into account that we'd want to pick with 2, 3 and PA's 1st, which would give 3-4 junk picks for trading to GC. That would mean 8-9 main list changes if we bring in 2 players via trade/FA (E.g. Fisher, Stephens). We'd also need to fill those list spots after the draft via DFA or PSS players (or lower draft picks), so there's also the opportunity cost of that compared to actually using those 'junk picks'. So, we're not an ideal candidate for that sort of trade with GC.

The original trade suggestion was the one I had more of an issue with. There's not a world where Gold Coast accept 2 x 2nds and 1 x 3rd for pick 4.

As others have mentioned, GC are actually not that far off having the points. I calculate about 1,000. And if they trade to us, we can actually make part of the agreement that we do not bid at any of the initial 3 Top 5 picks we have, which could save them anywhere between 300-600 points alone.

I would jump at the offer if I was GC as another Top 5 pick next year on top of their current F1 would give them a super strong hand next year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back