List Mgmt. Trade Hypotheticals (opposition posters post here)

Remove this Banner Ad

Well, this decision changes the trading equation ... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...s/news-story/112f1b7e18eda1f3127038e1a48a1477

AFL has only killed off the 'hidden pick' issue, but by only allowing clubs the number of selections that equate to live holes on their list, they are effectively forcing clubs to take full value rather than multiple late round picks in most cases. Will lose a significant amount of the benefit gained by non-academy clubs last year. As always, I'm sure we'll roll with the changes and work out how to gain best value from the rules - and some Victorian clubs will still whinge!
 
Giant Strides said:
Well, this decision changes the trading equation ... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...s/news-story/112f1b7e18eda1f3127038e1a48a1477

AFL has only killed off the 'hidden pick' issue, but by only allowing clubs the number of selections that equate to live holes on their list, they are effectively forcing clubs to take full value rather than multiple late round picks in most cases. Will lose a significant amount of the benefit gained by non-academy clubs last year. As always, I'm sure we'll roll with the changes and work out how to gain best value from the rules - and some Victorian clubs will still whinge!
Click to expand...

I don't get it. There are a hundred and something odd picks in the draft over 5 or 6 rounds. There aren't a hundred and something odd holes in club lists. And some of these picks we've already traded for.

Geelong are supposed to get our fifth round pick. If we're only allowed the number of picks equal to open slots and we only want four players in four players out, then there is no fifth round pick to give Geelong.

And if the first academy kid requires two picks to match, that means we'll be a player short on our list because we had four spots to fill, got four picks in the draft and used two on a single player. What if the next one costs two picks? We'll be out of picks with two holes to fill on our list.
 
Ichabod Noodle said:
I don't get it. There are a hundred and something odd picks in the draft over 5 or 6 rounds. There aren't a hundred and something odd holes in club lists. And some of these picks we've already traded for.

Geelong are supposed to get our fifth round pick. If we're only allowed the number of picks equal to open slots and we only want four players in four players out, then there is no fifth round pick to give Geelong.

And if the first academy kid requires two picks to match, that means we'll be a player short on our list because we had four spots to fill, got four picks in the draft and used two on a single player. What if the next one costs two picks? We'll be out of picks with two holes to fill on our list.
Click to expand...
WRT the fifth round pick - presumably because we've traded that out, it's guaranteed to remain 'live' for trading. (And truly, irrelevant to us, if we can't use it, and have traded it.)

Your other comments are on the money - the AFL has defacto conceded the game to the academy critics like Eddie without having to outright say so. Ingenious, but gutless. You're right in that if we use two picks each for two top players, we'll end up with selections at the back of the field to fill the list. The positive aspects of that - young guys like Connor Owen-Auburn or Ryan Garthwaite might end up on GWS' main list to shore up numbers. Or we'll upgrade Sam Reid & Dan Lloyd. As always, looking on the bright side, we'll really have to consider who we most want of the academy kids.

So, I think we'll do the opposite of what we did last year, and be aiming to keep our first round picks and even upgrade them if we think bids will come early. Conversely, it will actually encourage the other clubs to bid on academy kids early and force us to make a choice or exhaust our picks first. IMO, it changes the whole complexion of trading for the academy clubs, and will force us to play harder ball with clubs that want to trade with us. Funnily enough, the impact will be more on clubs like Carlton who would otherwise have good deals done for them.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Just reading the Carlton board, and apart from cr@pping themselves about their cheap player cow being cut off, they did point out the fact that GWS still has an advantage for 2 years (or until the AFL closes it also) in that we have an expanded list size. Therefore, we can still carry a number of extra picks that none of Brisbane, GCS & Sydney can. Not really fair to them, but leaves GWS able to make the deals for multiple late picks for another couple of years. I can hear the whinging starting in Hawthorn and Collingwood already ...
 
Giant Strides said:
Just reading the Carlton board, and apart from cr@pping themselves about their cheap player cow being cut off, they did point out the fact that GWS still has an advantage for 2 years (or until the AFL closes it also) in that we have an expanded list size. Therefore, we can still carry a number of extra picks that none of Brisbane, GCS & Sydney can. Not really fair to them, but leaves GWS able to make the deals for multiple late picks for another couple of years. I can hear the whinging starting in Hawthorn and Collingwood already ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, was going to point this out too. The rule change doesn't affect GWS for a couple of years yet because of all those empty slots that we already don't fill. Their existence (even unused) means we get live picks to potentially fill them, only to pass if we want.

Other teams can do similar if they're holding spots open for rookie picks (you can have up to two less senior spots and two more rookie spots) but it's a lot more limited.
 
Hi,

I'm interested in your thoughts on the trade value of Downie, Stewart and Barrett. I think all of them would fit Ports list profile and have a chance of game time.
 
Ellie Aquitaine said:
Apparently any club that traded in picks last year for this draft are able to use them as well.

So unlikely to affect this year's picks, but problematic for next year.
Click to expand...

Do you have a reference to where you heard this? I've heard it a couple of times on BF but can't find anything myself. :(
 
None of these offer anything to us. Harvey and Dal could be worth something to a team who are looking to "top up"
 
IanW said:
Personally, I think they need to be looked at as Cornes/McDonald types for a very young side.
Click to expand...

I think that moment/need has passed. Our core of players will have played 70-100 games and we have Mumford, Shaw, Griffen, SJ to be those older players. I'd prefer Hopper, Kennedy, Ahern and Pickett fighting for spots.
 
combaning said:
I think that moment/need has passed. Our core of players will have played 70-100 games and we have Mumford, Shaw, Griffen, SJ to be those older players. I'd prefer Hopper, Kennedy, Ahern and Pickett fighting for spots.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we arent a very young side any more.

Our 2012 side is all growed up :)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

dlanod said:
Do you have a reference to where you heard this? I've heard it a couple of times on BF but can't find anything myself. :(
Click to expand...

Someone on Twitter had a text from someone outlining the exemption for 2016 picks traded in 2015, but they'd removed the name of the source.

If I can find the tweet I'll post it.
Edit - Found it; para 25 of the Rule
image.jpeg
 
Last edited:
IanW said:
Yeah, we arent a very young side any more.

Our 2012 side is all growed up :)
Click to expand...
Yes our side is grown up and we probably start premiership favourites when u consider the majority are a year older with finals experience and with a list that still Hasan massive capacity to improve.Sj has played a crucial role but may retire.Harveys stats are better than SJ this year and he was probably the best player for North last week against the top team. Craig Cameron has stated we are probably after an experienced small forward who can put pressure on.Imagine it's grand final day next year and we have to make a decision between Pickett,Ahern and Harvey.I don't thinks it necessarily costing Ahern or Pickett a spot. They play 7 or 8 games and Harvey plays 17.They receive coaching from SJ and the games record holder.Your kidding yourselves that he wouldn't at least be considered.One year contracts can serve a purpose still.We may lose experience from the club with SJ moving to coaching,Patful maybe not recontractedPalmer traded,Reid delisted as well as others being traded
 
captainMyCaptain said:
His mail is normally spot on when it comes to both Sydney teams and his certainly on the money when it comes to Steele on this occasion.
Click to expand...
cheers mate, the expected value on our board is 2017 second, whats the consensus here?
 
Vic pokiesmon said:
Yes our side is grown up and we probably start premiership favourites when u consider the majority are a year older with finals experience and with a list that still Hasan massive capacity to improve.Sj has played a crucial role but may retire.Harveys stats are better than SJ this year and he was probably the best player for North last week against the top team. Craig Cameron has stated we are probably after an experienced small forward who can put pressure on.Imagine it's grand final day next year and we have to make a decision between Pickett,Ahern and Harvey.I don't thinks it necessarily costing Ahern or Pickett a spot. They play 7 or 8 games and Harvey plays 17.They receive coaching from SJ and the games record holder.Your kidding yourselves that he wouldn't at least be considered.One year contracts can serve a purpose still.We may lose experience from the club with SJ moving to coaching,Patful maybe not recontractedPalmer traded,Reid delisted as well as others being traded
Click to expand...
Mate there is absolutely no possible scenario we offer Harvey a contract.... Never happening
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Giant Strides
List Mgmt. AFLW Trade & Draft 2023
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
captainMyCaptain
captainMyCaptain
Giant Strides
  • Sticky
List Mgmt. 2024 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade & Draft
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
258
Views
16K
Colonial
Colonial
Colonial
Rage post here. Changes for the Blues
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
ClockworkOrange
ClockworkOrange
Giant Strides
List Mgmt. 2023 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade, Draft
110 111 112 113 114
Replies
3K
Views
93K
Orange crush
Orange crush
Giant Strides
#14 Toby Bedford (Traded in, 2022)
Replies
17
Views
2K
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Women's Footy Welcome to GWS - Zara Hamilton (Free agent, post 2022 National Draft)
Replies
0
Views
604
Giant Strides
Giant Strides

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top