Prediction Possible pick swaps

[Peel67skin]

The pick trades aren't for Green.

They're for a player AND Green. That's the whole point.

Green was always going to cost them 12 and 18 in points. If they can trade those and a pick in the late teens or early 20s and get another top 4 level talent, that seems a no brainer.

Who want their future 1st? Which is around 12-18 next year? Adelaide? GWS don't even have pick to move up pick 3.
Eg GWS get pick 3 and trade their future 1st out and then somebody bid on green on at pick 4, they only left future 2nd and 3rd.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

It is kind of beautiful that the Giants lost 500 points trading 12 and 18 for 6. Not that it’ll phase them too much, but the Saints made out like bandits from that deal and not only did GWS get nothing, they’ve gone backwards by about 25%. Still, worth trying to make something happen for them even if it doesn’t come off

 

[Crow_68]

It is kind of beautiful that the Giants lost 500 points trading 12 and 18 for 6. Not that it’ll phase them too much, but the Saints made out like bandits from that deal and not only did GWS get nothing, they’ve gone backwards by about 25%. Still, worth trying to make something happen for them even if it doesn’t come off

And the best move for them may be to admit it didn’t work and move back down the order. They are likely to have a few suitors and I am sure they could get a combo of later picks which would exceed the points value of 6.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

And the best move for them may be to admit it didn’t work and move back down the order. They are likely to have a few suitors and I am sure they could get a combo of later picks which would exceed the points value of 6.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm unclear on the rules. Does it really matter? 6 would match a bid at 4 anyway, they don't get to keep the excess points do they? The pick GWS really wants is pick 7 because it matches a bid at 4 exactly. Ideally they'd trade from 6 to 7 and extract whatever value they could in between.

 

[Crow_68]

I'm unclear on the rules. Does it really matter? 6 would match a bid at 4 anyway, they don't get to keep the excess points do they? The pick GWS really wants is pick 7 because it matches a bid at 4 exactly. Ideally they'd trade from 6 to 7 and extract whatever value they could in between.

My understanding is any excess points determine where pick 6 drops to. E.g. if there are 502 points left over after a match, they will receive pick 36 as well as Green.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

My understanding is any excess points determine where pick 6 drops to. E.g. if there are 502 points left over, they will receive pick 36.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

suck shit gws

 

[Comeonden]

Where is the draft being held? I'm in gold coast for the date of the draft so I'm hoping it's there. Would like to go.

 

[Orange Agent]

We’ve already rejected that offer.

That wasnt the offer.

Giants still hunting for top-five pick despite Trade Period lockout

GWS will continue to search for a top-five pick despite not reaching an agreement in the Trade Period

www.afl.com.au

"There have been offers made for it, but at the moment we haven't had anything that's satisfied us," Melbourne footy boss Josh Mahoney said on Wednesday.
"Have we been offered two first-round picks for it? No."

 

[WatWouldCyrilDo]

Dees should remember what happened the last time they traded down a top 3 pick with GWS.

Going from 3 to what will be 7 after the Green bid isn't worth a pick potentially in the 20s next year due to the compromised draft.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Dees should remember what happened the last time they traded down a top 3 pick with GWS.

We got a player who helped turn around the fortunes of the club in 2014 and played in our first three finals in 12 years, as well as another player who's in our best three kicks and finished seventh in our B&F this year?

The last time we did a deal involving a swap of picks 3 and 6 we ended up with Clayton Oliver. We'll only do a deal this time if we know we're going to be on the winning side again. Also it literally means nothing if the picks is 6 or 7 because of Green. You still end up with the exact same player - the sixth best player on the open draft.

 

[Chaisa]

Dees should remember what happened the last time they traded down a top 3 pick with GWS.

Going from 3 to what will be 7 after the Green bid isn't worth a pick potentially in the 20s next year due to the compromised draft.

Usually I'd agree but it feels like 3 to 8 is pretty even, it's worth it to get a first rounder back even with 6-8 guys looking at first round bids. O/c there's a risk but after Rowell and Anderson there's no obvious #3 IMO.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

It is kind of beautiful that the Giants lost 500 points trading 12 and 18 for 6. Not that it’ll phase them too much, but the Saints made out like bandits from that deal and not only did GWS get nothing, they’ve gone backwards by about 25%. Still, worth trying to make something happen for them even if it doesn’t come off

Where do you get 500 points from - its 350?


Also, that deal is roughly how much it always costs to move higher in the draft, there is anywhere between 20% and 50% loading to move higher in the draft (on points) so they paid a normal price.

The AFL doesnt release the rules on pick trading which is infuriating. My understanding is that you now cant trade a pick back after Sydney did it. So if you trade out pick 6, you cant trade pick 6 back in.

Is anyone across the rules enough to know if;
a) That rule only applies to live trades
b) You can trade futures back in.

Someone on our board had a great idea about a different kind of pick parking. You downgrade your pick slightly in the current year to keep it safe from bids

For example;
a) GWS trade us their pick 6 for our future 1st
b) A bid comes in on Green, eating their other picks
c) We make our selection at 6, then trade 7 to them afterwards for their future 1st

We move up a spot for free, GWS keep a pick safe from bidding. We could also do something with Hawthorn and pick 10.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Where do you get 500 points from - its 350?
View attachment 768158

Do you really need to ask where I got 500 from? I obviously forgot about 59, which would have been clear to you if you'd noticed that 500 - 350 = 150, which is approximately the value of 59.

Also the point is that GWS didn't move to 6 just to 'get higher in the draft' like a typical club might, they did it with the specific aim of jumping ahead of a bid on Green. Given they'll now most likely fail to do so that trade will have backfired as they'll be made to use 6 in the same way that they would have been made to use 12 and 18, except with less effect. Worth the effort for sure and they won't regret it, but it's as blatant an instance of a club literally only losing as a result of a trade as you'll ever see. If they get in ahead of Green it's fine but I doubt it'll happen.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Do you really need to ask where I got 500 from? I obviously forgot about 59, which would have been clear to you if you'd noticed that 500 - 350 = 150, which is approximately the value of 59.

Fair enough, I just put the numbers in and didnt think about it too much.

Given you forgot the other part to the deal, I'm sure you could appreciate me making a mistake and not sure the sass is required...

 

[Orange Agent]

Dees should remember what happened the last time they traded down a top 3 pick with GWS.

Going from 3 to what will be 7 after the Green bid isn't worth a pick potentially in the 20s next year due to the compromised draft.

Depends who they want. If best for needs will be available then, why wouldn't they?

 

[borderbarry]

With picks 51 and 82, can st.Kilda improve their draft position at all?

 

[Mego Red]

With picks 51 and 82, can st.Kilda improve their draft position at all?

Probably not, no. Not sure who'd want those picks.

 

[Mego Red]

I think my favourite idea is Hawthorn 30 for Crows 35 and 49.

That gets Crows four picks before 30 - which, with one late speculative pick, should be all they use - and improves the points that Hawthorn have for Maguinness.

 

[SeanM]

Someone on our board had a great idea about a different kind of pick parking. You downgrade your pick slightly in the current year to keep it safe from bids

For example;
a) GWS trade us their pick 6 for our future 1st
b) A bid comes in on Green, eating their other picks
c) We make our selection at 6, then trade 7 to them afterwards for their future 1st

We move up a spot for free, GWS keep a pick safe from bidding. We could also do something with Hawthorn and pick 10.

I think that would work. Though freo's future first is likely more valuable than gws's and their future first might be downgraded.

I would do
Pick 6 for Fremantle future third
(Someone bids for Green)
Gws future second for pick 7

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I think that would work. Though freo's future first is likely more valuable than gws's and their future first might be downgraded.

I would do
Pick 6 for Fremantle future third
(Someone bids for Green)
Gws future second for pick 7

It definitely is more valuable, there is no swapping of future 1st, its just downgrading one pick in the current draft.

Freo give GWS their future 1st for 6

GWS give Freo their Future 1st back for pick 7 once it gets to it.

Trade 1
Freo 2020 1st -> 6

Trade 2
7 -> Freo 2020 1st

Net Result
6 -> 7

I dont think the rules around future picks and swapping is readily available because the AFL is a joke but I'd be interested to know if this is legal and find it amazing clubs havent thought of this already. From memory, even Sydney's version last year wasnt as clean and simple as this

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Probably not, no. Not sure who'd want those picks.

You don't think pick 82 will be a hotly contested commodity? This is why you don't work in list management.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

It definitely is more valuable, there is no swapping of future 1st, its just downgrading one pick in the current draft.

Freo give GWS their future 1st for 6

GWS give Freo their Future 1st back for pick 7 once it gets to it.

Trade 1
Freo 2020 1st -> 6

Trade 2
7 -> Freo 2020 1st

Net Result
6 -> 7

I dont think the rules around future picks and swapping is readily available because the AFL is a joke but I'd be interested to know if this is legal and find it amazing clubs havent thought of this already. From memory, even Sydney's version last year wasnt as clean and simple as this

I'm pretty sure the AFL can police things like this for being blatant draft tampering. That aside though you can't trade something back in within the same trade period unless it's passed through two sets of hands. So like GWS' pick 6 would have to go to Freo and then someone else before it was allowed to get back to Freo. Similarly Freo can't trade their 2020 1st back in without it changing hands at least one more time.

 

[SeanM]

I'm pretty sure the AFL can police things like this for being blatant draft tampering. That aside though you can't trade something back in within the same trade period unless it's passed through two sets of hands. So like GWS' pick 6 would have to go to Freo and then someone else before it was allowed to get back to Freo. Similarly Freo can't trade their 2020 1st back in without it changing hands at least one more time.

With so many clubs now having FS/Academy players. I can see it happening organically and not organised between two clubs beforehand.

If a club expects a bid before their first round pick. Trade out their first round pick for a combination of future picks. Then after their player has been bid on, try to get back into the first round with their combination of future picks.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

With so many clubs now having FS/Academy players. I can see it happening organically and not organised between two clubs beforehand.

If a club expects a bid before their first round pick. Trade out their first round pick for a combination of future picks. Then after their player has been bid on, try to get back into the first round with their combination of future picks.

Sure. But I don't think it's going to be as easy or productive as clubs think it is, and eventually someone's going to **** it up hard for what is actually not that much gain. But active collusion isn't really that possible or even likely.

 

[Crow_68]

It definitely is more valuable, there is no swapping of future 1st, its just downgrading one pick in the current draft.

Freo give GWS their future 1st for 6

GWS give Freo their Future 1st back for pick 7 once it gets to it.

Trade 1
Freo 2020 1st -> 6

Trade 2
7 -> Freo 2020 1st

Net Result
6 -> 7

I dont think the rules around future picks and swapping is readily available because the AFL is a joke but I'd be interested to know if this is legal and find it amazing clubs havent thought of this already. From memory, even Sydney's version last year wasnt as clean and simple as this

Not sure why anyone would be happy to help out GWS when it effectively removes another quality player off the draft board....

On HTC 2PS6200 using BigFooty.com mobile app