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

[Lore]

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!

Spoiler: 2023 Draft Order

Spoiler: 2024 Draft Order, aka Future Picks

Spoiler: Blue Tick Rumours

 

[Sheezel2Wardlaw]

15 & 18 to GWS for 7

Pick 2 & f3 to Hawthorn for 4 & f1.

3, 4, 7 & 17 to the draft.

WC: Reid
GC: Walter
Hawks: Duursma
North: Watson
North: Curtin
Dogs: Mckercher
GC: Read
Melb: O'Sullivan
North: Sanders

 

[amaz199]

Again, 2 and 3 ain't going anywhere.

We won't give up those. Why go through a shit year finishing 17th, get pick 2, get pick 3 as compo from a player that was required, then piss one of them away (with other first or second rounders) just so we can move up one spot? I'd rather get somewhere between pick 5 and 10 with our later picks.

We know the Eagles have many holes and our offer was what we deemed doable in terms of addressing that, if they don't accept then cool.

We don't have to rush nor bite, it's up to the guys with pick 1.

 

[shinboner magic]

Mckercher is ours

 

[roos_fanatic08]

And Reid too. Often good but often misses.

Curtin and Sanders best of the top 10?

Yep, was meant to include Reid. Technically he is beautiful kick but can often bite off more than he can chew.

Sanders would be my pick. He had nice technique combined with composure and good decision making. Curtin 2nd.
Wilson and Hardeman would be my pick of best kicks in that 10-20 range. Then later on in the draft you have Moir, Luai & George Stevens.

 

[justroyal]

I think Curtain and McKercher leaves a much bigger statement and fills a lot more holes

 

[amaz199]

Clubs would be more likely to trade with our later picks to get a higher draft selection.

The Eagles are being firm because their draft selections are grim. They won't budge.

 

[Shermanator]

Mckercher is ours

 

[Tas]

Who cares what they've learnt.

Are you PMSing or just letting everyone know which topics you do not care about? Just ignore things that don't interest you.

 

[JGreezy]

I rate Sanders right at the top, just behind Reid and Walter.

I really like the idea of going something based on:

Melb - 3
WC - 2, 11
NM - 1 & 6 (Reid & Sanders, arguably the two best players)

Then we still have 15, 17 & 18. We can package a couple of those up to chase a pick 7 or 8 to get Caddy or O'Sullivan.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

Maybe because I’m interested in American sports I find the best available trope baffling. If you have a good quarterback and the top of the draft is full of quarterbacks you trade down to create value in a position of need. We will end up having 30 top 10 draft picks on our list that are all mids or half forward flankers. I would love north to manufacture a pick in the 6-10 range to get one of the key position backs. I wouldn’t mind trading 3 for 6 and 11 and take both key backs.

The major difference though is that the talent pool is so much bigger in the US that if someone jumps in and grabs your guy, it doesn't really matter, you just grab next best and they're basically a like for like trade.
Imo it's riskier in afl, you get significant changes in level of talent within 5 pick windows

 

[HELLSBELLS]

I want 2 picks in the top 3

Don't care which 2 I just want 2.

If we don't have 2 in the top 3 we would have shit the bed after a great start.

 

[amaz199]

Brady has just done his magic and is coasting through the rest of the trade period. Done a great job.

The NMFC footy dept had the plans set from the beginning and executed brilliantly. Whatever happens from here is other clubs being desperate to bite our deals.

 

[LB2Snake]

Well if the difference between 3 and 6 is so stark then the Dees can pay a premium for it?

3 & 18 for 6, 11 & Melbournes 2024 1st

Actually nah * em

You sound like a west coast supporter.
I reckon we could possibly get 6 and 11 for 3, if we were prepared to do it. But, I think there could be merit in the 3 team trade proposed above, just not sure West Coast could see a way through it.

 

[R00StaR]

Kerch cant kick mate. DGAF.

I think Sanders suits us better anyway. He's more an LDU type which will fit better with Wardlaw/ Phillips/ Powell.

While the game is about gut running its also about burst, play making out of defense and quality ball into the F50. Sanders is a gun at all of that, just may not have the tank of McKercher.

Anyway do we really want another McK already?

 

[Devington]

I rate Sanders right at the top, just behind Reid and Walter.

I really like the idea of going something based on:

Melb - 3
WC - 2, 11
NM - 1 & 6 (Reid & Sanders, arguably the two best players)

Then we still have 15, 17 & 18. We can package a couple of those up to chase a pick 7 or 8 to get Caddy or O'Sullivan.

I really like having 2 of the top 3 and then a horde of other picks at the back end of the first round, which is where we sit now. But something like your post would also be acceptable to me.

Fact is we need the highest end quality AND a handful of well rated potential. We have glaring list gaps as well as a far too many players that sit in the "Well it could be worse" category. The latter kills us just as much as the lack of elite talent, we speak of how Collingwood carried some very average players but we carry twice as many of those.

 

[Tiberius]

Ps bloke I work with is related to Mckercher. West coast flew to Tassie to meet with him last week.

West Coast flew to Tasmania to meet a bloke you work with?

 

[shinboner magic]

Remember when we weee mid table and drafting at picks 8-16 and crying out to have a top end pick - now there’s some that want to trade back.

 

[BlueandWhiteinmyBlood]

Everyone thought Sheezel was a forward too and he won the BnF off HBF

Imagine instead of giving our #1 draft pick each year a particular number like Pies used to, we just gave them hbf and guilt tripped them one bloke won a bnf having never played there before.

I can only go by my own feelings and until now I've prob always judged him a bit on his brother.......but I've come around to just how bloody good he is. I think through realising that Curtin might actually slide a bit, going from media reports etc, so i watched Zane's highlights again. He's smooth AF and pretty *ing quick too.

I was like this too but remembered Troy and Adam came before Joel.

 

[JGreezy]

I really like having 2 of the top 3 and then a horde of other picks at the back end of the first round, which is where we sit now. But something like your post would also be acceptable to me.

Fact is we need the highest end quality AND a handful of well rated potential. We have glaring list gaps as well as a far too many players that sit in the "Well it could be worse" category. The latter kills us just as much as the lack of elite talent, we speak of how Collingwood carried some very average players but we carry twice as many of those.

I want two of my top 3. But it seems that the club disagrees on Sanders being in there.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

Imagine instead of giving our #1 draft pick each year a particular number like Pies used to, we just gave them hbf and guilt tripped them one bloke won a bnf having never played there before.


I was like this too but remembered Troy and Adam came before Joel.

Also Jason and Cameron before Travis.

 

[LB2Snake]

Actually thinking about this more, I think it’s really important we have 2 of the top 3 picks. Preference is 1 and 2, of course.
So we either do a deal with Melbourne for 3 and end up with 2, 6 and 11, or with WC and end up 1 and 2(or 3) plus a teens pick. Much prefer the WC one obviously.
Our end goal is to just be picking 3 players or 4? Does anyone know?

 

[Disco Dew]

Sanders would be my pick.

Best kid in it and no one is changing my mind.

 

[Shinboner1]

I guess it's time to look up mckercher highlights.. rip Watson

 

[Gasometer]

Yeah but you only get your info from Nostradamus.

Ummm, Quasimodo according to Bobby

 

[zoomba23]

Ps bloke I work with is related to Mckercher. West coast flew to Tassie to meet with him last week.

Due diligence. Nothing in it