List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 20, 2009
28,285
39,130
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
It’s relevant for players that delist themselves and aren’t eligible for the DFA
Yes. It still exists for situations where a trade doesn't occur, as it decreases the power of a club that has a player who wants out who the club would prefer to keep. Without it, the club with the listed player has too dominant a hand. The Players Association would want it to stay. But it rarely gets used.
 
Last edited:

Lockyer24

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 3, 2001
21,442
7,352
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Heat, Victory, Man Utd, Redskins
Having too many developing small forwards at once might limit each other’s chances, but if we we are strategically going the Richmond path of having a quick team of pressure/decently skilled small guys it does make sense
 

mike123

Hall of Famer
Sep 13, 2013
31,399
28,180
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Juventus
Having too many developing small forwards at once might limit each other’s chances, but if we we are strategically going the Richmond path of having a quick team of pressure/decently skilled small guys it does make sense
On the other hand we shouldn’t pingeonhole our current developing small forwards in the one role. I could easily see McCreary as a small defender and Ginivan as a midfielder.
 

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 20, 2009
28,285
39,130
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
We do have some positions with enough players on the list in the right age bracket, but small forward isn’t one of them.
Yeah but what's the likelihood that enough of those young talls and mids make it and have us sorted with what we've already got. We've got no young pacy flankers for either end either. Just should go best available.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Crazy Tails

Premiership Player
Nov 30, 2006
4,431
5,084
Collingwood Heartland
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Is there any other teams?
Any chance, instead of trading back into the second round this year, that we live trade to stockpile more 2022 picks in the hope that we can do a swap with the Lions next off season; when they are likely to want to trade out their future first for more points? Could end up with 2 x 2022 first rounders.
 

Prochard123

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 28, 2014
7,120
5,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
After the Darcy bid, our first 3 picks will likely be 35, 37, 39 (pick 23 to Geelong for 32, 34 and both get used on Darcy which moves our picks forward by 1).

I wonder if we can package all 3 together for a strong pick, while bringing in 3x picks in the 60s (all of which would be brought forward significantly from all the bdis) and still have enough points for Daicos.
 
Last edited:

Prochard123

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 28, 2014
7,120
5,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
After the Darcy bid, our first 3 picks will likely be 35, 37, 39 (pick 23 to Geelong for 32, 34 and both get used on Darcy which moves our picks forward by 1).

I wonder if we can package all 3 together for a strong pick, while bringing in 3x picks in the 60s (all of which would be brought forward significantly from all the bdis) and still have enough points for Daicos.
35 + 39 to Melbourne for future 2nd + 45 + 53 (due to the Darcy bid)

37 + future 3rd (Hawthorn) to Essendon for future 2nd + 52

We gain 2x future 2nds (Essendon & Melbourne) while still being able to match the Daicos bid. Thoughts?

2x future 2nds can then be used to bring in an early 2nd to select an early draft slider.

Who says no?
 

Sea fog

Premiership Player
Jun 24, 2012
4,637
2,647
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Any chance, instead of trading back into the second round this year, that we live trade to stockpile more 2022 picks in the hope that we can do a swap with the Lions next off season; when they are likely to want to trade out their future first for more points? Could end up with 2 x 2022 first rounders.
And if Jordy and Moore leave we could more.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad