Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. The 2017 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals Thread (cont. in Part II)

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I doubt we are going to get him as North Melbourne are going to say "pick us and we will give you a $500,000 a year contract for 3 years straight away" and there is no way the Swans are going to be able to match that sort of money.

I probably should have scrolled down a little further before replying to the original post :drunk:
 
No news today it seems aside from Cats might not be able to trade in Watts which makes it between us and Port, surely comes to us.
why do we want him....a player who has been in the system for 9 years and seemingly never taken any accountability for his performances...imagine he was already a swan with that record....it's not hard to. This is a player who ain't getting any better and if anyone goes for that i50 crap....seriously...Watts is going to bust who ever gets him.....if you are struggling to get games at Melbourne....and they don't want you, what does it tell you. Watts is a really big case of Buyer beware
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Didn't we have a "confirmed" thread and a "hypothetical" thread last year?

This is the Hypothetical thread (obviously reading some of what's in here...) - So yeah, a "confirmed" thread would be good.

It's just nothing has been confirmed yet....
As we do every year, we will create a new thread for any signings once they happen.

There is nothing happening beyond hypotheticals at this point, so this thread is all we need
 

Remove this Banner Ad

About the same chance as a Powerball win I'd reckon. Was hardly setting the NEAFL alight.

Maybe but it was his first games of footy in five years, I think he deserves to be cut some slack if he's a bit rusty.
 
aj is gone... can hardly break into a jog and avoids the contest... doesn't deserve a rookie spot.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I know this is 100% hypothetical, and it is probably a horrible idea, but is this kind of trade legal:

Geelong In: Ablett
GC In: Tippett

Basically with this trade, we are using Geelong to subsidise Tippets large salary so that we can get rid of him. This is because it has been reported that GC want Geelong to pay some/all of the salary of the player traded in. So essentially, GC will be paying tippet about what he is worth, with Geelong stumping up the rest of the cash to meet Tippets contract obligations.

Note: The reason that it may not be legal is because technically the Swans don't get anything. Maybe, some late pick Swaps and/or if Dew wants one of our fringe players that could be added in.
 
Last edited:
I know this is 100% hypothetical, and it is probably a horrible idea, but is this kind of trade legal:

Geelong In: Ablett
GC In: Tippett

Basically with this trade, we are using Geelong to subsidise Tippets large salary so that we can get rid of him. This is because it has been reported that GC want Geelong to pay some/all of the salary of the player traded in. So essentially, GC will be paying tippet about what he is worth, with Geelong stumping up the rest of the cash to meet Tippets contract obligations.

Note: The reason that it may not be legal is because technically the Swans don't get anything. Maybe, some late pick Swaps and/or if Dew wants one of our fringe players that could be added in.
I honestly don’t think Geelong want anything to do with Tippett, so I can’t see that happening
 
I honestly don’t think Geelong want anything to do with Tippett, so I can’t see that happening

Geelong need something to get Ablett. GC want $$ of the player they get paid due to the front loading of the Ablett deal. Its logical for them as they get Ablett for free, with a bit of a salary cap hit which will happen regardless.

Edit: It would be more would GC want Tippet???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top