Strategy Trade and List management Thread Part 3 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[Struggle]

Remember when Martin apparently chose the Blues for less money? 700k lol, he's not even better than Bailey Dale

 

[dogwatch]

I think you also need to take into account other clubs nga and f/s picks next year as well as it could have a bearing on clubs capacity to make a bid.
Think I read that there's about 17 0r 18 picks tied to clubs next draft.

Yes, that's true. Any matched bids will shuffle the subsequent draft order by taking out the successful club and pushing it further down the line. The problem for us is we won't be anywhere near next in line if we've already matched a top 5 bid. So clubs other than us will shuffle up to replace those who are shuffled back. And those clubs can then bid if they want.

I don't know if it's ever happened before that a club has had a swag of tied players who go in the first 2 rounds, especially with so many other tied players likely to be in the first 2 rounds. It might be a good thing for us because the draft might be suffering from "bid burnout" by the time it gets to considering Stevens and MacPherson and they might slip a bit further than would otherwise be the case. It's not entirely logical (a player's assessed worth shouldn't change) but human behaviour isn't always logical. It'll be interesting to watch how the 2020 draft plays out - could be chaotic!

The AFL would be rightly justified in having a very hard look at the system if this happens. I presume that's why their current review is under way. I'd be pretty p*ssed off if I was the supporter of another club and saw the Bulldogs win a flag and still pick up a player worthy of being in the 5 and two others worthy of being under pick 30. Especially if they got them by paying 20% less than their face value.

There's a LOT of water to go under the bridge before any of that happens but right now it seems we are further away than ever from the notion of an uncompromised draft.

 

[Mofra]

Should we make a play for Jack martin (through the national draft)? or that ship has sailed?

No, I don't want a player that views us as their 'silver medal'. Let him walk to Melbourne or make Carlton pay up at the ND.

We'll bank the best available kid and move on.

 

[House_of_Dahl]

Id draft him at 13 if we can. Think he slots into our side well but I know others wouldnt be interested in this approach

That would be a bit mad IMO considering what was reportedly offered to Carton. They'd have given us back 20 for 13.

 

[Dav1d]

Jack Martin is good, not 700k good though.

 

[TBOW]

I wonder if Essendon tried to get in Bruce's ear once Daniher wanted out.

They could have taken 9 + the future first for Daniher then flipped 31 back to Sydney for Jones into Bruce.

It would have made a lot of sense considering where they are at.

Now they have a grumpy player who they can't get on the field and will likely lose for a first rounder next year anyway.

Guess it's all conjecture when Bruce wanted us.

Think Bruce is a great value pick up fwiw. Very moneyball.

 

[go the dogs]

Id draft him at 13 if we can. Think he slots into our side well but I know others wouldnt be interested in this approach

Would be better off swapping 13 to Richmond for 19 & 41. Use 41 to get Martin before the blues at 43. ( they wont use pick 9 ) then still use 19 to draft a player if this was the case.

 

[mattwa]

Would be better off swapping 13 to Richmond for 19 & 41. Use 41 to get Martin before the blues at 43. ( they wont use pick 9 ) then still use 19 to draft a player if this was the case.

This looks good. I just think by all reports this draft isnt that flash and with all the young kids we have coming in next year adding another more seasoned AFL player rather than hitting the draft could be a win for us for our chances in 2020-2022. It all depends on who the list management team are targeting really and whether Martin stacks up well against the rest of the draft

 

[Bro_Pro]

I know we must be after a certain player with not letting pick 13 go but if he’s not there at 13 I think it would be good to trade it to Richmond for pick 19 and there future second/third or to Gold Coast for pick 20 and future 3rd.

 

[Dogs Rule]

This looks good. I just think by all reports this draft isnt that flash and with all the young kids we have coming in next year adding another more seasoned AFL player rather than hitting the draft could be a win for us for our chances in 2020-2022. It all depends on who the list management team are targeting really and whether Martin stacks up well against the rest of the draft

But, I don’t want a player who doesn’t want to be at our club.

Martin has made his bed, so he can lie in it. Head to the draft and get some kids in.

 

[Dogsman16]

Any interesting pick swaps we would contemplate.

Dogs 13 + 51 - Ade 23,28,37

I wouldnt do 13 for 19+41. Would prefer 41 to be closer to 30.

 

[go the dogs]

Any interesting pick swaps we would contemplate.

Dogs 13 + 51 - Ade 23,28,37

I wouldnt do 13 for 19+41. Would prefer 41 to be closer to 30.

I Only suggested this in regards to a poster saying pick 13 on Martin.

Looks like we are only using 2 picks in the draft plus 80 for rokkie upgrade. 13 & 53 are our picks.
If the player/players we apparently want at 13 is gone i would be looking at the following options

North and offering 13 & 53 for 26,27 and there 3rd next year.
Brisbane 13 & 53 for 21 34 & next years 3rd

 

[Northernsoul74]

Should we make a play for Jack martin (through the national draft)? or that ship has sailed?

Power was asked if we considered making a play for him late but he said no as it’s very difficult to change a players mind once they’ve nominated a club. I’d suggest that ship had sailed even in the draft.

 

[Bont2Bruce]

Jack Martin is good, not 700k good though.

Brad Hill isn't 900k good either but that is rumoured to be what Saints will be paying him.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Last year after Smith and West - both top-20 draft prospects - we subsequently took 5 players who were aged between 19-23, ie "young" mature-agers. Whilst clearly that's just how the draft played out it being 5/5 clearly it was a broader strategy.

I reckon our intense desire to keep pick 13 and our willingness to move on middle picks might mean we go in with a similar strategy - use the pick to top up with elite talent that will likely have a good career, but then, ignore the crap shoot that is 18 year olds who aren't on the top 20, and look to see which 19-23 year olds have slipped through the cracks. These players are likely to slip very late in the draft so if we competely don't value any of the 18 year olds around, say, pick 40, then if we're intending to draft a 21 year old anyway in many cases pick 70 is 95% as good as pick 40 in targeting those players.

 

[VitalDread]

Just a reminder, Clubs can still trade draft picks till 22 of November

 

[Barking Mad]

I’m hoping Power makes lots of noise to suggest we’ll be taking Martin at 13 to force Carlton to use 9. It may just let someone slide the extra spot to our 13.
Not against taking him at 13 if Blues call our bluff as Martin may well quickly change his mind after a few wins on the board.

 

[Munnez]

Sydney retain Papley - "you're s**t, one of the worst trade periods"

Essendon retain Daniher - "Dodoro is a god amongst men, incredible trade period"

As reported by the Essendon Rag the HUN

 

[Dogsman16]

As reported by the Essendon Rag the HUN

The essendon tweet "mission accomplished" in regards to retaining their list had me ROFL.

Absolutely hilarious.

 

[The Inbetweener]

I've had another look at the draft points we might need in 2020 and what it means for us.

Let's make some working assumptions as follows:

1. We finish 4th in 2020​

2. Adelaide finish in the same spot as this year (11th)​

3. We want to match bids on all of Ugle-Hagen, Stevens, MacPherson and Raak​

4. JUH gets a bid at pick 2​

5. Stevens gets a bid at pick 20​

6. MacPherson gets a bid at pick 25​

7. Raak gets a bid at pick 50​

Here's the table of points required with discounts applied:

Player	Type	Pick	Points	Discounted
Ugle-Hagan	NGA	2	2517	2013
Stevens	NGA	20	912	715
McPherson	FS	25	756	559
Raak	NGA	50	273	76
TOTAL			4458	3363

And here's how many points we would accrue for finishing 4th while Adelaide finish 11th, bearing in mind that Adelaide now has our 2020 2nd round pick and we have their 3rd:

Draft Round​	Pick​	DVI Points​	Notes
1​	15​	1112​
3​	45​	362​	Adelaide's 3rd rounder
3​	51​	259​
4​	69​	49​
		1782​	TOTAL POINTS ACCRUED

If my interpretation of the draft rules is correct what this means is that we would be 1581 points in deficit (= 3363-1782). That's quite a bit. That's equal to needing pick 8 and a bit of loose change (about pick 71) or some other combination, for instance pick 20 plus pick 28.



My understanding is that you can go into deficit up to 1723 points for the following year but you would of course lose picks in the deficit year accordingly. You can however acquire future picks by trading and that can soften the blow a bit. It allows you to go into a greater deficit and/or not lose so many picks or places in your draft position.

So say we didn't trade for any 2021 picks and we finished 4th again in 2021. We would get our four NGA/FS players but we would lose any other picks before the 5th round in 2020 AND we would lose our first round and second round picks in 2021. Our first available draft pick in 2021 would be pick 51.

Naturally it won't be that simple because a number of clubs (not just us) will have FS and NGA players they want and will probably match bids for them which pushes everybody else down the order meaning those pushed down the order get fewer points. This is however offset somewhat by the fact that the 2nd and 3rd round players we want might also be pushed down the order so the points required will also be reduced.

It's also further complicated by the fact that we have the likes of Sam Darcy and the West twins coming along in 2021 and we may want to match bids for them, so a deficit that deprives us of all but 402 points in 2021 is far from ideal. We'd only have the equivalent of about pick 31 available to us without going into deficit again in 2022.

Don't be too picky: this is just a very rough exercise to get an idea of the size of the problem. We really don't know how those four NGA/FS players will look in 12 months time. We might decide we don't want all of them or other clubs might not be so keen on them by then. We don't know where we will finish on the ladder. We don't know by how much any priority picks and other matched bids will change the draft order (and the available points) for the 2020 draft.

However, as an approximation exercise the key points for me are these (assuming we do match bids on all four players):

• We will probably lose all draft picks before the 5th round in 2020
• We could quite possibly lose both our round 1 and round 2 draft picks in 2021 to pay off the 2020 haul
• We might even go into a smaller deficit for 2022 depending on whether we match bids on Darcy, the West twins etc.

This is not necessarily a bad outcome as we will have acquired some very good players out of it (we hope!)

I think it means that Sam Power should try to wangle some extra picks/points for the 2020 draft and maybe also for the 2021 draft, depending on our draft aspirations for those years. (Naturally we must also have an equivalent number of list vacancies to match the acquired draft picks.)

I'd appreciate any feedback on this. What have I overlooked? Is the logic sound?

Great post. I wouldn’t be surprised if we still trade our 3rd this year for a 3rd in next year on draft night like we did last year if our target in the 50s is gone

 

[Rookie]

You never know what could happen on draft day, someone might offer us a great deal for pick 13 if they like a player still on the board. For instance, a future first and a pick in the 40s. Even a future first from the right club would be pretty tempting.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I want a thug life meme of Power smoking a spliff with sunnies on to Snoop Dog music

He did it all from here, amazing

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Got to say, don't really get the Gold Coast stance on Martin. A future second and future third is pretty fair value in my eyes. Don't see Carlton climbing out of the bottom 6 yet so probably looking at 25 and 40.

I know next years draft is pretty compromised but there is still a fair bit you could do with those picks. Could trade them next year for future picks again, could package them up to x amount of teams that will likely need draft points. Just don't understand what you get out of losing him for nothing.

Fair enough playing hardball to try and get 9 for 15 as well as that future second but once it gets down to the last hour, you've got to get something done.

No idea how that situation plays out now. Whether he puts himself in the ND or PSD. He's not going at pick 9 and Carlton don't have another pick until 43 which he won't last to. Might have to risk the PSD and hope Gold Coast don't pick him up again like they've threatened.

Still think he can be a star in the right environment (eg not at Gold Coast). Would love to somehow be in the conversation but think that's impossible with where it sits right now.

 

[Northernsoul74]

Got to say, don't really get the Gold Coast stance on Martin. A future second and future third is pretty fair value in my eyes. Don't see Carlton climbing out of the bottom 6 yet so probably looking at 25 and 40.

I know next years draft is pretty compromised but there is still a fair bit you could do with those picks. Could trade them next year for future picks again, could package them up to x amount of teams that will likely need draft points. Just don't understand what you get out of losing him for nothing.

Fair enough playing hardball to try and get 9 for 15 as well as that future second but once it gets down to the last hour, you've got to get something done.

No idea how that situation plays out now. Whether he puts himself in the ND or PSD. He's not going at pick 9 and Carlton don't have another pick until 43 which he won't last to. Might have to risk the PSD and hope Gold Coast don't pick him up again like they've threatened.

Still think he can be a star in the right environment (eg not at Gold Coast). Would love to somehow be in the conversation but think that's impossible with where it sits right now.

Blues surely just get him in the PSD at pick 3. Fair play to GC for making the stance as they really have no need for the picks Carlton we’re offering.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Blues surely just get him in the PSD at pick 3. Fair play to GC for making the stance as they really have no need for the picks Carlton we’re offering.

People keep saying that but I don't see how it's the case. Sure they might not use the picks as the are but they can still do alot with them. Package them up to get a higher pick, trade them again next year for future picks. Theres no point letting him go for nothing. Fair enough giving Carlton the F.U. if they were offering significant unders but that doesn't appear to be the case.

If the ladder stays the same, they've currently got picks 1, 11, 20 and 33 next year and they've essentially knocked back 22 and 40.